Business

The Supreme Court blocked the construction of a new Russian embassy. “Plot too close to parliament”

2025-11-13 07:30

publication
2025-11-13 07:30

Australia's Supreme Court blocked the construction of a new Russian embassy near the parliament building in the country's capital and upheld a law that invalidated the lease on national security grounds, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

The Supreme Court blocked the construction of a new Russian embassy. "Plot too close to the parliament"
The Supreme Court blocked the construction of a new Russian embassy. "Plot too close to the parliament"
/ FORUM

In 2008, Russia obtained a 99-year lease agreement for a plot of land for diplomatic purposes, located only about 300 meters from the Australian Parliament building. There were plans to build a new embassy on the plot, as the current one is located in the Canberra suburb of Griffith. Russia paid 2.75 million Australian dollars (approximately 1.79 million US dollars) for the lease agreement.

“The presence of this embassy poses a risk.”

In 2023, the Australian Government introduced the Home Affairs Bill allowing the cancellation of the lease of this plot for reasons of state security. As the Australian prime minister said at the time, the decision was made after receiving “very clear security recommendations regarding the risks posed by a new Russian presence so close to the parliament building.”

However, Russia challenged the Australian government's decision in the Supreme Court, arguing that parliament did not have the power under the constitution to pass such a law. The government in Canberra, in turn, argued that under the provisions of the constitution regarding the power of parliament to legislate for the country's territories, he could invalidate the lease agreement.

Russia is entitled to compensation

On Wednesday, Australia's highest court unanimously ruled that the law correctly invoked parliament's constitutional power to take land on “fair terms.” It added that Russia has the right to compensation because, as he stressed, the lack of proposals for the use or application of the land is “immaterial” and compensation “is required by the constitution.”

Australia's Attorney General Michelle Rowland welcomed the Supreme Court's decision. “Australia will always defend our values ​​and we will defend our national security,” she said in a statement. (PAP)

ek/san/

Topics

Ashley Davis

I’m Ashley Davis as an editor, I’m committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accuracy in every piece we publish. My work is driven by curiosity, a passion for truth, and a belief that journalism plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse. I strive to tell stories that not only inform but also inspire action and conversation.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button