Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 5103
- 23 Comments
AREAS OF CONCERN ABOUT THE OFFICE OF THE MARA (OMARA)
The role of the Office of the MARA is very important, as it protects the vulnerable.
- Subsequent to an agent facing disciplinary proceedings there is a right of review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal).
- The process of presenting witnesses and obtaining documents in support at the Tribunal includes the following:
Draft Summons have to be filed. The Tribunal has the discretion to grant the Summons. The admissibility of evidence requested is a matter for the Tribunal’s discretion. The Agent can only hope the evidence requested will be approved.
Currently OMARA has extraordinary power. For example, a recent decision enables supervision to extend to the provision of alleged “indirect immigration assistance”, that is not directassistance. This may include, for example, hearsay allegations from persons the former Agent has never met. The basis of an allegation may be a statement by a third party, not the Complainant about what the Agent has allegedly done. The whole issue of regulation of “indirect immigration assistance” may open a Pandora’s box. The obvious question is what are the parameters – the limits – of the power examining the behaviour of the Agent with respect to the provision of such alleged “indirect assistance”?
OMARA has also acted upon the basis of complaints made by the Department in circumstance where the purported complainants are unaware as to the existence of any complaint and in circumstance where a person’s matter has not been “finally determined”.
Further, OMARA has acted on behalf of persons who complain on behalf of an alleged victim. On a number of occasions, having located the alleged victim, they have then asserted they were not aware of the complaint or significant particulars provided - or all of the complaint -are incorrect. Such scenario may raise serious issue with respect to the use of client information, issues of privacy and procedures adopted upon hearsay.
As a result of the discovery process at the Tribunal I have identified extraordinary material significantly supportive of the disciplined Agent. For example, this material has been located in Departmental files.
The above raises three issues of concern that may be recognised as follows:
i) OMARA ascribe significant evidentiary weight to any representation (written, oral, phone call, etc) made by the Agent to them. Such representation may constitute the evidentiary foundation leading to the Agent’s licence cancellation.
ii) It is a matter of grave concern that the conclusions made upon the basis of such representation appear to be, may have been, or were formulated in the absence of consideration of the contents of the Complainant’s Departmental File and other relevant documentary material.
iii) It is respectfully submitted that it should be a mandatory procedure for OMARA to examine the Departmental File and provide to the Agent supportive information (known as exculpatory evidence) prior to the formulation of any disciplinary decision. That is to assert the Departmental File may contain supportive relevant material fact capable of exonerating the Agent. It may be viewed as manifestly unsatisfactory that such material fact only becomes apparent subsequent to cancellation of the Agent’s licence.
iv) The remaining issue is based upon the devastating personal damage (emotional, financial, psychological) of widespread publicity attendant to the publication of disciplinary decisions. On occasions this has been accompanied by Ministerial Press Release (not covered by Parliamentary Privilege), which has the effect of further insulting and irrevocably destroying the life of the cancelled Agent. It is a matter of grave concern that such publications can be made in the absence of any hearing and prior to the commencement of any process of discovery. For example, where the Department’s files possibly (dependant upon Tribunal discretion) can be obtained and witness and alleged complaints can be investigated. I have used information discovered in the Departmental file in support of an Agent (post cancellation of his licence).
v) What may be a matter of grave concern is that as a result of subsequent investigation at the Tribunal it may be that the character of the published cancellation decision and Ministerial Press Release is capable of being challenged by virtue of material OMARA and the Department had access to prior to the commencement of any investigation.
Comments
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016Yeah yeah yeah. Heard it all before ... migration agents good ... OMARA bad. Tell someone who cares ... if you can find someone that is.
Wait this analysis would assist any agent that is facing disciplinary action from the OMARA ... like maybe Kurt Kraues? Funny you don't hear any strident defence of poor old Kurt anymore ... -
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
My name is Liana Allan and I will continue to defend and protect the innocence of my friend and former colleague, Kurt Kraues. Justice sometimes takes a long time. Here is my defence and I stand firm with my real name to protect his.
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
REMOVED BY MODERATOR TO PROTECT FORMER AGENT
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016I don't think OMARA is bad, I just think they are incompetent.
They are an operational division of DIBP and have right from the get go had a serious conflict of interest. It is a tough gig being an RMA and each case is going to be different. MA does not throw its colleague to the wolves but seeks, in every case where an RMA is in trouble to assist. The case of Kurt Krause is important because in the rush to beat their chest, DIBP urged the then Assistant Minister Senator Michaelia Cash to rush to press and in doing so she, without the protection of parliamentary privilege, said things which in my view were not only incorrect but also defamatory of Kurt. As a consequence of those ill considered remarks the career of this man was destroyed as was his livelihood. The conduct of the OMARA in being the Respondent in proceedings at the AAT has, in my view, been disgraceful and obstructive. That conduct is not conducive to determining the relevant facts or the law but is "positioning" and is sailing very close to the wind as far as the obligation to act as the "model litigant". MA has been stalwart in its support of Kurt and all members of MA. Undiecover Agent does have a handle on this but should get his hand off it...I doubt they are an agent anyhow. -
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
Tell u what Mr Levingston QC ... when you defend Kurt I'll come along with my popcorn to watch the master legal eagle at work ... like when you took on the OMARA in that CPD case ... man you really socked it to them with yr legal argument that day. Did you get costs awarded too? I would have gone for exemplary damages as well ... nasty nasty hobbitses ... I mean OMARA
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
The omara conduct in Kraus case is not nearly half as their [WORD MODERATED OUT TO PROTECT FORMER AGENT] conduct in my case.
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
I will not shut up about OMARA. I will expose them for what they are
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
Me too ... I will expose them for what they are ... people fighting for truth! Justice! And the OMARAcan way!!
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
The public and agents can probably appreciate how upset former agents can be. Their careers have been destroyed. Their lives have been damaged. For this reason it will be necessary for the moderator to remove comments which might prejudice them in any way, if they are fighting for justice.
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
So, the OMARA or their legal team are now using the MA blog. Who else would write the stuff 'Undiecover agent' is writing?
-
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
OMARAcan way is the [WORD REMOVED TO PROTECT FORMER AGENT] and [WORD REMOVED TO PROTECT FORMER AGENT] way- they will soon be exposed and you will ..... in your Undiecover agent.
-
Wednesday, 30 November 2016
Looks like we have a troll.
Undiecover agent is a troll...don't forget rule 1..." Don't feed the Trolls"
Ignore the evil little dwarf. ( you know who you are) -
Thursday, 01 December 2016
Feed the troll ... make it a better place, for you and for me and the entire human race ...
-
Thursday, 01 December 2016
Undiecover agent just made me laugh and I am pro-MA.
-
Wednesday, 30 November 2016
It's the monkey I am sure it is.
-
Wednesday, 30 November 2016
MA 1
Troll 0 -
Thursday, 01 December 2016
Based on what Christopher? Based on MA's track record? Hmmmm let's see ... CPD case against OMARA ... yep big fat win for Mr Levingston and MA ... shld publicise this more ... white paper on independent commission... yup another big win for MA ... you in the running for being the independent commissioner Chris? Negotiating salary at the moment? What else?
-
Wednesday, 30 November 2016
I have seen a successful business and professional life destroyed by Professional Standards . The agent in question still suffers from ongoing mental health issues. Professional Standards and the CEO were involved in a subsequent cover up .
Chris you are wrong OMARA - Professional Standards are not incompetent they are dangerous rogue public servants whose conduct is criminal and malicious -
Thursday, 01 December 2016
This troll is awesome. Seriously they know stuff. I want more troll. The more troll the more jolly the festive season.
Immigration blog
REMOVED BY MODERATOR TO PROTECT FORMER AGENT