A man from Papua New Guinea has challenged the conditions imposed on him after his release from detention, arguing they breached constitutional rights when he was granted a bridging visa.

Among these conditions was a mandate to wear a monitoring device continuously and adhere to a curfew, requiring him to stay at a specified address from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily.

The federal government defended these stringent measures, citing the need to safeguard the Australian public. The man had a criminal history, including a murder conviction as a juvenile and domestic violence offences as an adult.

However, the High Court, in a majority decision, declared these conditions invalid, marking another setback for the government’s efforts to impose monitoring on individuals released from indefinite immigration detention.

This monitoring system was established following a pivotal 2023 High Court ruling that deemed indefinite detention unlawful when there was no realistic prospect of deporting the individual from Australia in the near future.

The ruling prompted the release of 150 detainees with criminal backgrounds, some of whom had been convicted of severe crimes such as murder and rape, further complicating the government’s stance on immigration detention policies.

A number were arrested for allegedly reoffending after their release, sparking fierce public and political backlash.

The government reacted by introducing laws requiring some of the former detainees to wear ankle monitors and abide by a curfew, but those measures were struck down in 2024.

The High Court ruled the conditions were unconstitutional because they represented a punishment imposed by the government not the judiciary.

The regulations were amended to only apply under circumstances in which a person posed a substantial risk of committing a serious offence and the measures were deemed necessary for community safety.

The PNG man who succeeded in the latest High Court challenge had his visa cancelled in 2024 after being jailed for domestic violence offences.

He was subsequently taken into immigration detention before being released into the community on a bridging visa with curfew and monitoring conditions.

The conditions were still incompatible with Australia’s constitution, the High Court found today.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said people with cancelled visas should leave the country when asked about the decision.

“While obviously the government would have preferred a different outcome, the government’s ambition was never about ankle bracelets,” he said in a statement.

“Fortunately, we now have the agreement with Nauru, because the best thing for people who have had their visa cancelled is to not be in this country.”

Some 43 people who have been on electronic monitoring in the community are expected to be immediately transferred to mandatory reporting conditions, requiring them to check in with authorities at a set time and place.

The cost of the High Court challenge will be paid by the federal government.