Could Australia permanently ban the 'ISIS brides' from coming home?

How exclusion orders could ban Australian citizens from returning home indefinitelyCBy Cason HoTopic:Extremism10m ago10 minutes agoThu 19 Feb 2026 at 12:02amAustralian families with links to the so-called Islamic State have been attempting to leave the Al-Roj camp in Syria and return to Australia. (Supplied)abc.net.au/news/australian-citizens-banned-returning-overseas-exclusion-orders/106361634Link copiedShareShare articleAustralian citizens could be indefinitely banned from returning from overseas under domestic counterterrorism laws, experts have told the ABC.Earlier this week a group of 34 women and children, who are Australian citizens affiliated with Islamic State militants, attempted to return to Australia from a Syrian refugee camp.One of the women has been barred from returning after being given a temporary exclusion order (TEO) under Australian counterterrorism laws.But the ban may not be as temporary as the name of the order implies.Who can be excluded from returning to Australia?TEOs were created in 2019 to allow the Australian government to ban people from returning from overseas if they are deemed a national security threat.Under the legislation, Australia's home affairs minister can issue a TEO if they believe it could prevent someone from carrying out, supporting, or being trained to carry out an act of terrorism.Most — if not all — of the 11 women in the group attempting to return to Australia this week were married to men who had relocated to Syria and Iraq to join the terrorist organisation known as IS.They are living in the Al-Roj refugee camp in north-eastern Syria, which has held thousands of people of various nationalities who were displaced after the defeat of IS in 2019.The 23 children were either taken to Syria or born in Al-Roj and, along with some of the women, have been described by a United Nations expert as "victims of terrorism".Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said only one of the women has met the legal threshold to be issued a TEO, "according to advice from security agencies".How long can you be excluded for?An exclusion order can be issued for up to two years on anyone aged 14 and above.But here is where things get tricky.Anyone issued with a TEO can apply for a "return permit", which must be granted and nullifies the TEO.However, the law allows the minister to put conditions on the permit, including delaying the person from entering Australia to "assess the risk" posed by their return.But under this condition, the person can only be barred from re-entering for 12 months, as Mr Burke highlighted on Wednesday."The practical impact, if someone applies to come [home while subject to a TEO], is you can keep them out of Australia for a further 12 months," he told 7.30.So in effect, applying for a return permit would shorten how long a TEO can keep someone out of Australia from two years to one.The real catch is what comes next.Can you be banned from returning forever?While the law imposes time limits on TEOs, there is nothing preventing another exclusion order from being issued after the first one expires.The two-year deadline "does not prevent the making of another temporary exclusion order in relation to the same person", according to section 10 of the act.To top it all off, under section 17 return permits can be revoked "on the Minister's own initiative".What this means practically is that Australian citizens could, technically, be banned from returning indefinitely.Could exclusion orders be unlawful?University of Sydney legal expert Helen Irving said the potential for rolling exclusion orders made the law constitutionally "questionable"."It makes that person's right as an Australian citizen to enter their own country subject to a clearance [from the minister]," she said.Helen Irving says it is possible a court would find "perpetual exclusion" unconstitutional. (ABC News: Billy Cooper)"That, in my view, is a breach of the fundamental constitutional … right for citizens to re-enter their own country."In 2022 the Australian High Court ruled on a case in which the government had stripped an Australian-Turkish dual citizen of his Australian citizenship after he had been convicted — then pardoned — of terror-related offences in Syria.The High Court found taking away the man's citizenship was unconstitutional as it was a punishment, which could only be ordered by a court, and not the government.Dr Irving said the use of TEOs by the government could be similar in effect, but the small number of cases and lack of any known legal challenges meant the law was untested."It's possible that the court would also find that perpetual exclusion was unconstitutional," she said.As of June 2025, only nine TEOs had been issued since they became available in 2019, according to the latest data tabled in parliament by the Department of Home Affairs.Five of those orders were revoked and three people had returned to Australia with return permits.Australian National University