A/HRC/WGAD/2017/71 which the Human Rights Committee held that a period of approximately four years of detention was prolonged and thus arbitrary and in breach of article 9 (1) of the Covenant.1 20. Accordingly, the source submits that Mr. Imasi’s detention constitutes arbitrary deprivation of his liberty, falling under category III. Category IV 21. The source also submits that Mr. Imasi, as an asylum seeker who is subject to prolonged administrative custody, has not been guaranteed the possibility of administrative or judicial review or remedy. 22. In that respect, the source notes that the High Court of Australia, in its decision in the case of Al-Kateb v. Godwin, has upheld mandatory detention of non-citizens as a practice that is not contrary to the Constitution of Australia. The source also notes that the Human Rights Committee, in its Views on C. v. Australia, held that there is no effective remedy for people subject to mandatory detention in Australia.2 23. As such, Mr. Imasi lacks any chance of his detention being the subject of a real administrative or judicial review or remedy. The source submits that his detention therefore constitutes arbitrary deprivation of liberty, falling under category IV. Category V 24. According to the source, Australian citizens and non-citizens are not equal before the courts and tribunals of Australia. The effective result of the decision of the High Court in AlKateb v. Godwin is that, while Australian citizens can challenge administrative detention, non-citizens cannot. Therefore, the source submits that Mr. Imasi’s detention constitutes arbitrary deprivation of his liberty, falling under category V. Response from the Government 25. On 2 August 2017, the Working Group transmitted the allegations from the source to the Government under its regular communications procedure. The Working Group requested the Government to provide, by 2 October 2017, detailed information about the current situation of Said Imasi and any comments on the source’s allegations. 26. The Government of Australia replied on 26 September 2017. In its reply, it notes that Said Imasi is also known as Yassin Youssef. It confirms that he arrived in Australia on 28 January 2010. Upon arrival, he was detained in accordance with section 189 (1) of the Migration Act, as he arrived without a valid travel document or any other form of identification. The Government contests the claim that Mr. Imasi was arrested upon his arrival, noting that immigration officials do not have the power to arrest people as they are not police officers and no crime had been committed. 27. The Government explains that, in accordance with national legislation, all unlawful non-citizens must be kept in immigration detention until they are removed or deported from Australia, or granted a visa. That applies equally to those who may be stateless persons, as such persons can still be removed to a third country. In the case of Mr. Imasi, the Government argues that the Department of Immigration and Border Protection has been unable to establish his identity, which has caused a delay in the determination of his immigration status, and that his claim to statelessness is the subject of an ongoing investigation. 28. The Government agrees with the source that one of the reasons contributing to the continued detention of Mr. Imasi is the inability to establish his identity. The Government notes that Mr. Imasi has been interviewed by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection on several occasions since his arrival in order to establish his identity. On 11 January 2017, an Identity Assessment Report was issued, in which the authorities found that the identity Mr. Imasi was claiming could not be confirmed. A further identity investigation was initiated in February 2017. The Government indicates that there had also been a prior 1 2 4 See A. v. Australia (CCPR/C/59/D/560/1993), para. 9.4. See C. v. Australia (CCPR/C/76/D/900/1999), para. 7.4.