By Christine Chen SYDNEY (Reuters) -Australia’s highest court on Wednesday blocked Russia from building a new embassy in the nation’s capital, unanimously upholding a law that cancelled its lease on national security grounds. Russia owned a lease to a plot of land that is about 300 metres (984 feet) from Parliament House in Canberra and […]
World
Australia’s top court blocks Russia from building new Canberra embassy
Audio By Carbonatix
By Christine Chen
SYDNEY (Reuters) -Australia’s highest court on Wednesday blocked Russia from building a new embassy in the nation’s capital, unanimously upholding a law that cancelled its lease on national security grounds.
Russia owned a lease to a plot of land that is about 300 metres (984 feet) from Parliament House in Canberra and intended to build a new embassy building there to replace an older building elsewhere in the capital.
But in 2023, the Australian government introduced a law to cancel the lease after receiving “very clear security advice as to the risk presented by a new Russian presence so close to Parliament House”, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said at the time.
Russia challenged the law in front of the High Court of Australia, arguing parliament was not authorised under the constitution to pass such a law.
On Wednesday, the court ruled unanimously that the Home Affairs Act 2023 validly invoked parliament’s constitutional power to seize land on “just terms”, though it said Moscow was entitled to compensation.
In a statement posted on Telegram, Russia’s embassy to Australia said it would “carefully study the text of the ruling”.
The Russian government secured a 99-year lease for diplomatic use of the site in 2008, paying A$2.75 million ($1.79 million).
Construction on the new site kicked off but was never completed. Russia’s existing embassy is in Griffith, a suburb.
Australia’s government argued that the lease’s cancellation was supported by parliament’s power to make laws for the nation’s territories, including the Australian Capital Territory, where Canberra is located.
It said it did not need to pay Russia “just terms” because the constitution only required compensation in cases where property was acquired for a specific use case, which it said did not exist in this instance.
It also argued that compensation should not extend to paying a foreign state as it would be “incongruous” with the Home Affairs Act.
The court said the absence of a proposed use or application for the land was “irrelevant” and compensation “is what the constitution requires”.
Australian Attorney-General Michelle Rowland welcomed the decision. “Australia will always stand up for our values and we will stand up for our national security,” she said in a statement.
($1 = 1.5389 Australian dollars)
(Reporting by Christine Chen in Sydney; Editing by Thomas Derpinghaus and Alison Williams)
