Doubts over drone program after under-fire minister’s detainee claim

The existence of a drone program to monitor former detainees has been thrown into doubt after under-fire Immigration Minister Andrew Giles made the claim in defence of the government’s handling of multiple visa crises.

Despite Giles’ assertion, government sources say drones are not being used to track detainees after the practicality of the program was questioned by a security expert and the Coalition demanded to know details of the secret measures.

Andrew Giles said the government was using drones to monitor former detainees.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

While facing a political storm over his ministerial direction 99 being used by a tribunal to justify reinstating the visas of a series of serious criminals, Giles also responded to fresh Home Affairs figures showing three freed murderers and 26 sex offenders were not wearing monitors.

He told Sky News on Thursday the government had invested $250 million to boost monitoring through various means of the cohort released after the High Court ruled indefinite immigration detention was unlawful.

“And that’s enabled things like using drones to keep track of those people we know,” he said.

Giles’ office refused to provide more information on the claim, except to say that it was accurate, while the Australian Border Force – which conducts surveillance of immigration detainees released following last year’s High Court decision – declined in a statement to confirm it was using drones in its operations.

ABF grounded its drones last year.Credit: James Brickwood

ABF last year grounded its drone fleet after the manufacturer, which has been blacklisted in the United States over security concerns, was accused of having links to the Chinese military. The Australian Federal Police, which is the other federal agency responding to the High Court fallout, does not surveil in its role on the taskforce with ABF.

AFP deputy commissioner Ian McCartney told a Senate estimates hearing on Friday evening the agency was not using drones on the cohort and he had no knowledge of drones being used as part of the taskforce’s operations. “We believe there hasn’t, but as a matter of completeness we’ll take it on notice,” he said.

Victoria Police confirmed it was not using drones to monitor released immigration detainees while NSW Police said it was a Commonwealth issue.

Dr John Coyne from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute previously said it would be an expensive and impractical exercise to continuously watch people with drones, adding it could require more than a dozen people a day to monitor one individual.

Opposition home affairs spokesman James Paterson said the government should urgently clarify what Giles meant. “Who is operating these drones? What are the safeguards for Australians living nearby? Why was this never previously disclosed publicly?” he said.

A spokesperson for Giles said, “the minister’s comments were correct”.

Giles vowed earlier in the week to rewrite direction 99 to put a premium on community safety, while Prime Minister Anthony Albanese trashed the Administrative Appeals Tribunal over its decisions on Friday, vowing a reset under a new, Labor-created body.

During a Senate estimates hearing on Friday afternoon, AAT officials revealed half the cases considering Giles’ direction so far this financial year overturned the government’s initial decision to deport foreigners on character grounds.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promises a reset under the new tribunal.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

The direction mandates a person’s ties to the Australian community be a central consideration in their visa status.

AAT registrar Michael Hawkins said 184 visa cancellations had been set aside out of 367 decisions this financial year, with 100 cases still in the pipeline.

Following coverage of rapists’ visas being reinstated and a man being released from detention to then allegedly murder somebody, Hawkins said members of the tribunal were “hurting” because of the difficult decisions they had to make about whether people stayed in Australia.

“You own the decision because you had uppermost in your mind, whether you were denying someone the opportunity to come to Australia who should genuinely be here, but their case wasn’t sufficient,” Hawkins told Senate estimates.

“You would be concerned that that person could be gunned down on their return to their own country.”

But Albanese blamed the Coalition-stacked tribunal for allowing foreign-born criminals to stay, describing it as a dysfunctional body riddled with failed Liberal candidates.

“If you’re a former Liberal councillor somewhere who’d lost preselection, chances are you could put your hand up and get a guernsey on the Administrative Appeals Tribunal,” Albanese said.

“We’ve abolished it, gotten rid of it and replaced it with the Administrative Review Tribunal, which will be more rigorous, which will not be full of former party political appointments.”

The government this week passed legislation to create the Administrative Review Tribunal, which will have a merit-based hiring process instead of government appointments.

Former Coalition attorney-general Michaelia Cash attracted Labor criticism shortly before the 2022 federal election for a slew of Liberal-linked appointments to the AAT, tasked with independently reviewing government decisions.

However, one of the most cited cases in the deportation controversy was presided over by former Labor MP and Speaker of the House Anna Burke, who referenced Giles’ direction in allowing a New Zealand citizen who raped his stepdaughter to stay in Australia.

Despite disquiet in Labor ranks about Giles’ tenure in the portfolio, Albanese said there would be no “imminent” changes to his ministerial lineup. He also said he maintained a good relationship with the New Zealand government after Labor announced it would change the rule.

The Albanese government had softened immigration laws as part of an effort to improve diplomatic ties with NZ, which had complained about the deportation of Kiwi citizens who had spent little time in the country.

During a press conference earlier on Friday, New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he regretted Australia’s decision to scrap direction 99.

“We’ll be advocating very strongly,” Luxon said. “I raised my concerns with the prime minister yesterday morning during our phone call.

“We understand Australia is a sovereign nation, and it can make its own decisions, but we have great concern about that decision because we don’t think that people who have very little attachment to this country but with strong connections to Australia should be deported here.”

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.