One Nation has launched an ambitious push to rewrite Australia’s counter-terrorism laws, unveiling proposed legislation that would dramatically expand the government’s ability to prevent suspected Islamic State fighters and supporters from returning to Australia.

The proposed Protecting Australians from Foreign Terrorist Fighters Bill 2026, announced by Pauline Hanson ahead of Parliament’s return, would introduce an entirely new legal framework allowing the Federal Court to issue exclusion orders against Australians who voluntarily joined or supported terrorist organisations overseas.

Although One Nation does not have sufficient numbers in either house of Parliament to pass the legislation on its own, Hanson hopes the proposal will place pressure on both Labor and the Coalition to adopt tougher national security measures as concern grows over Australians detained in the Middle East who could eventually seek to return home.

The proposal comes amid renewed national debate surrounding Australians who travelled to Iraq and Syria during the height of Islamic State’s territorial expansion more than a decade ago.

Recent reports that several Australian men imprisoned in Iraq for alleged Islamic State involvement could eventually be released have intensified political discussion over whether Australia’s current laws provide sufficient protection if those individuals attempt to return.

Hanson argues they do not.

According to the One Nation leader, Australia’s legal framework was designed before many of today’s challenges surrounding foreign terrorist fighters became apparent, leaving what she believes are unacceptable gaps in the nation’s security system.

A new Foreign Terrorist Fighter Exclusion Order

The centrepiece of the legislation is the creation of a Foreign Terrorist Fighter Exclusion Order.

Under the proposal, the Home Affairs Minister would be able to apply to the Federal Court seeking an order preventing an Australian citizen from returning if the court is satisfied the individual voluntarily engaged in terrorism-related conduct overseas.

The proposed legislation would also allow an exclusion order where the court determines a person presents an unacceptable risk to public safety and that existing legal mechanisms cannot adequately manage that risk.

Unlike executive decisions made solely by ministers, Hanson says the proposed framework deliberately incorporates judicial oversight by requiring Federal Court approval before an exclusion order could take effect.

She argues that approach has been designed to strengthen the proposal’s constitutional foundation while ensuring decisions remain subject to independent judicial scrutiny.

Broader passport powers

The legislation extends well beyond exclusion orders.

It would significantly strengthen the government’s authority to suspend or cancel Australian passports where individuals become subject to exclusion proceedings.

Current arrangements already permit passport cancellation in certain national security circumstances.

However, Hanson argues additional powers are required to prevent individuals connected to terrorist organisations from exploiting legal or administrative gaps that might facilitate international travel.

The bill would also suspend obligations requiring the government to issue return permits while court proceedings remain underway, preventing automatic administrative processes from undermining ongoing legal action.

New criminal offences

Another significant feature of the proposal is the creation of new criminal offences targeting anyone who deliberately organises, facilitates or assists the unauthorised return of designated foreign terrorist fighters.

Supporters argue these provisions would discourage individuals or organisations from helping suspected extremists bypass government restrictions.

Combined with strengthened passport powers and exclusion orders, One Nation says the legislation would establish multiple legal barriers preventing high-risk individuals from re-entering Australia.

Hanson has described the package as one of the most comprehensive counter-terrorism proposals her party has introduced during its time in Parliament.

Political reality in Parliament

Despite its ambitious scope, the legislation faces substantial political obstacles.

One Nation holds only a small number of parliamentary seats and cannot pass legislation without significant support from other parties.

Even if the Coalition backed every provision, additional votes from crossbench senators or government support would still likely be required.

Acknowledging that reality, Hanson has written to Opposition Leader Angus Taylor inviting the Coalition to work with One Nation on a bipartisan national security response.

Taylor has confirmed receiving the correspondence but has instead encouraged One Nation to support the Coalition’s own legislative proposals addressing similar issues.

That response highlights a broader political dynamic.

Both One Nation and the Coalition argue Australia’s counter-terrorism framework should be strengthened, yet they differ over the precise legislative approach and who should receive political credit for any reforms.

Growing concern over Australians detained overseas

The bill has emerged against the backdrop of continuing concern about Australians detained in Iraq and Syria following the collapse of Islamic State’s self-declared caliphate.

Over recent years, successive Australian governments have repatriated some women and children from camps in north-eastern Syria under tightly controlled arrangements.

Several adults have subsequently faced criminal charges after returning to Australia.

The latest debate, however, focuses primarily on Australian men alleged to have fought for or actively supported Islamic State who remain imprisoned overseas.

If foreign authorities eventually release those prisoners, Australia could face difficult legal questions concerning citizenship, constitutional rights and the practical limits of preventing Australian citizens from returning home.

The Albanese Government has consistently maintained that it does not support the return of terrorist fighters but has also acknowledged that decisions must ultimately comply with Australian law and constitutional principles.

Balancing security and constitutional rights

The proposed legislation inevitably raises complex legal issues.

Australian citizens generally possess a legal right to enter Australia, making permanent exclusion particularly challenging under constitutional and international legal principles.

One Nation argues its proposal addresses those concerns by requiring Federal Court approval rather than granting ministers unilateral power.

Whether that model would survive constitutional challenge if enacted remains uncertain and would ultimately be determined by the courts.

Legal experts have long observed that counter-terrorism legislation must carefully balance national security objectives with fundamental legal protections, including procedural fairness and judicial oversight.

A broader national security debate

Australia has significantly strengthened its counter-terrorism laws since the emergence of Islamic State in 2014.

Parliament has introduced offences relating to foreign incursions, expanded control orders, temporary exclusion orders, passport cancellation powers and stronger surveillance capabilities for security agencies.

Successive governments have described those reforms as among the toughest counter-terrorism measures in Australia’s history.

Hanson nevertheless argues further reform is required because current legislation was largely developed before many of today’s practical challenges surrounding returning foreign terrorist fighters became fully apparent.

Her proposal also reflects broader public concern following recent domestic security incidents and continuing instability in parts of the Middle East.

Will the bill pass?

At present, the legislation’s parliamentary prospects remain uncertain.

Labor has not indicated support for the proposal, while the Coalition has suggested it intends pursuing its own national security agenda rather than simply adopting One Nation’s legislation.

Even if the bill ultimately fails, it is likely to shape debate when Parliament returns.

The proposal places renewed pressure on both major parties to explain whether existing laws provide sufficient protection or whether additional reforms are necessary as more Australians linked to overseas terrorist organisations potentially seek to return.

For Pauline Hanson, the bill also reinforces One Nation’s long-standing emphasis on national security, border protection and counter-terrorism as defining political issues.

Whether or not the legislation is eventually enacted, it has already succeeded in placing Australia’s approach to foreign terrorist fighters back at the centre of the national political conversation.

With Parliament scheduled to debate national security issues in the coming weeks, the proposed Protecting Australians from Foreign Terrorist Fighters Bill 2026 is expected to become one of the most closely watched pieces of private members’ legislation introduced this year. Its fate will ultimately depend not only on parliamentary numbers, but also on whether Australia’s major parties conclude that further changes to the country’s counter-terrorism framework are both legally workable and politically necessary.