The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia has rejected a challenge by a citizen of Liberia to Ministerial cancellation of his Refugee and Humanitarian visa. The Court’s decision in the case, Gjoubeh v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2015) FCAFC 883, was handed down on 24 March 2015 and is in all likelihood the final chapter in a long-running legal battle.  The consequence of the Court’s decision (in the absence of any further intervention in the case by the courts, which appears to be remote) is that the visa holder will lose the right to continue living in Australia, and will have to return to Liberia, where he may face an uncertain future.

This case had its origins in 2007, when the visa holder had sexual relations on two occasions with a 12 year old girl who was also a refugee from Liberia. The visa holder was 42 years old at the time. These incidents resulted in the girl’s becoming pregnant, and then the termination of that pregnancy.

The visa holder was prosecuted over this conduct in the District Court of South Australia. He was initially convicted of one count of rape and two counts of unlawful sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 14. Following an appeal to the South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal, the rape conviction was quashed. However, the remaining two charges were upheld, and the visa holder was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 27 months.

To all RMA partners

Migration Alliance is very pleased to announce a new sponsor: ETS, creator of the TOEFL® test.

The TOEFL® test is accepted by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to fulfil the English-language proficiency requirements for many Australian sponsored and independent visa categories, including:

The Association of Fee Free Migration Agents (AFFMA) is a registered charity that provides an independent legal service to financially disadvantaged refugees and asylum seekers eligible for protection visas in NSW. Run entirely by a team of committed volunteers, (including Registered Migration Agents) our Newtown office is open to the public and stands as a support basis for people looking to apply for protection visas.

The underlying aim of our organisation is to be an independent service provider that offers pro bono legal services to refugees and asylum seekers. The provision of legal advice extends from the initial application for a protection visa to the actual granting of the visa. Additionally, we provide ongoing assistance to successful applicants as they begin the process of resettling in Australia: This means we connect our clientele with any alternative services, such as Centrelink, and support them any way they may need to make their settlement a positive and enriching experience. 

The refugees and asylum seeker clientele that AFFMA assists do not have access to funds necessary to pay for customary legal assistance; they may not be fully aware of their rights to appeal; and benefit from having their application processed pro bono via a wholly independent organisation with no affiliation with the Australian Immigration Department or other government institutions.

AFFMA’s dedicated volunteers work to ensure that successful applicants also benefit from the additional support we provide in connecting our clients with alternative services – such as Centrelink; the ATO; mental health services. This additional support system is vital to ensuring that new and permanent migrants are aware of the services they are entitled to; their rights and obligations under Australian law; feel supported and welcome as they resettle permanently in Australia; and have the information necessary to move forward in their lives.

Pro bono agents should support the AFFMA organisation not only as it is a beneficial and vital service provider for financially disadvantaged refugees and asylum seekers in NSW, but because it is an independently run support mechanism fuelled by committed volunteers who are passionate about the assistance AFFMA provides. At this time, we are looking to 2015 as a year to expand our services and develop our community involvement to become a pertinent one-stop network in NSW. We always welcome new volunteers and Registered Migration Agents to be a part of the AFFMA organisation, and encourage pro bono agents to support us in any capacity they can.

Labour and the Greens have initiated a broader Senate inquiry to investigate the use of temporary working visas and the reported abuse and exploitation of foreign workers, just days after the conclusion of a similar inquiry commissioned by the federal government, according to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald.

The new inquiry follows just days after Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Michaelia Cash, announced that the government will take-up most of the recommendations of an enquiry concluded last month on the 457 visa program.

The new inquiry is expected to have broader terms of reference. ACTU president Ged Kearney said the inquiry would also look at whether employers are genuinely trying to hire Australian workers first. "Australia's migration program should not be at the beck and call of big business" he said.

Greens deputy leader and workplace relations spokesperson Adam Bandt said that "with rising unemployment and a mining investment boom coming off the boil, now is the time to ask whether the current working visa system strikes the right balance".

The Australian Industry Group said the new inquiry was "a waste of Senate time and resources

Just as it is true that every applicant for an Australian visa is subject to the “character test” under section 501 of the Migration Act, it is equally true that applicants for Australian citizenship must pass a second “character test” under the Australian Citizenship Act 2007.  The character tests under these laws are not the same: while section 501 of the Migration Act describes with a high level of specificity the types of issues that will disqualify a visa applicant (for example, having a “substantial” criminal record), the Citizenship Act provides only in general terms that an applicant must be a person of “good character” at the time that a decision is made on the application.

Unlike the Migration Act, the Citizenship Act does not include further guidance concerning the meaning of the term “good character”.  The meaning of “good character” has, however, been discussed in decisions of the Federal Court of Australia, including the case of Irving v Minister of State for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs  (1996) FCA 663; (1996) 68 FCR 422. In the Irving case, the Court held that “good character” is to be understood in the “ordinary sense” of these words, and is to be interpreted to mean “the enduring moral qualities of a person”.

The “character test” of the Citizenship Act  proved fatal to an application for citizenship in a case that was decided by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal  earlier this month, FBMR and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, (2015) AATA 116 (2 March 2015).