I am not going to give up the fight to have unregistered immigration practitioners removed from lodging Australian visa applications for and on behalf of unwitting clients.  The fresh new Form 956 goes part of the way there on this journey, but we need to keep moving forward.

Unregistered migration practitioners who engage in the lodgement of Australian visa applications on behalf of vulnerable persons are exploitative, predatory and unethical.  They do not have a demonstrated level of sound knowledge.  If they were registered, the level of incompetency shown in their work would likely result in a decision by the Office of the MARA to cancel their registration, and the removal of their right to practise.

Sometimes unregistered practitioners commit offences under a number of different laws over an extended period.  Use the examples of Abel Kalpinand Prasad, or Eddy Kang.  These two individuals were operating onshore, on our own Australian soil.  Look how hard it has been for the authorities to bring them to justice.  If only they had been banned from lodging visa applications in the first place.  If only the system prevented their access.

These unregistered immigration practitioners are not members of professional associations like Migration Alliance, the Law Council or the MIA, which have strong self-regulatory standards. 

By remaining unregistered, these 'criminal entrepreneurs' avoid the scrutiny of their peers and the authorities, rather than having to address deficiencies in their practice.

As was the case with Abel Kalpinand Prasad, such practitioners sometimes move to different jurisdictions that have less regulatory scrutiny, or no treaties (such as extradition treaties) with Australia in order to continue their illegal or unethical conduct.

Public warnings including this Ministerial Release have been issued about these types of people, after they have wreaked havoc on peoples lives.   To me, these examples highlight the concerns about the suitability of public protection with respect to services delivered by unregistered immigration practitioners.

I would like Federal Parliament to enact legislation to address what I see as a gap in the law.  We need to strengthen public protection for unwitting Australian visa applicants, especially those located outside Australia.  These vulnerable consumers use the services of unregistered immigration practitioners.  We need to block their access to ImmiAccount, and all paper-based applications.

From my perspective there are a few practical things to consider as a part of blocking unregistered practitioners from lodging Australian visas on behalf of vulnerable persons:

1. No email address should be used more than once for visa lodgments, unless it is the email address of a Registered Migration Agent, as Registered Migration Agents need to lodge multiple visa applications for and on behalf of their clients.  Individual applicants do not.  They have one email and they only need to use it once for themselves, should they wish to lodge a visa application independently.

2. IP Addresses should be tracked.  Repeated pings from the same IP Address, but for different visa applicants should be red-flagged as potential unregistered agent practice, and the ImmiAccount should freeze applications until evidence is provided that the person is not using an unregistered practitioner.

3.  Block the use of the Tor network for Australian visa applications

4. Block the use of a proxy for Australian visa applications so that unregistered practitioners cannot hide their IP.

5. Issuing of a ‘prohibition order’ to unregistered practitioners and their businesses as soon as there is confirmation of their attempts to lodge Australian visa applications for their clients.  A prohibition order should be publicly available on the Office of the MARA and Department of Home Affairs websites, declaring the person and business as an unregistered person who are specifically prohibited from providing Australian immigration-related services altogether.  Australian Government websites could even go as far to state that if a person is to use an unregistered immigration practitioner then there is a serious risk to the health of their visa application and security of their bio data and other information. 

6. Statutory Declarations could be included as part of online visa applications and could be signed by the visa applicants who are lodging Australian visas on their own, without using a Registered Migration Agent. These Statutory Declarations could state that the visa applicant/s lodged the visa application themselves, and without third party assistance.  Potentially, attaching this declaration to PIC 4020 may assist as a deterrent from using unregistered practitioners.  The alternative box would be that the visa applicant used the services of a Registered Migration Agent.  

7. Only email addresses registered with the Office of the MARA should be used in association with a Migration Agent Registration Number (MARN) and no other email address.  This would address the potential for unregistered practitioners to engage in MARN theft.  MARN theft is the diversion of business away from a RMA by using (stealing) an agent's MARN, and their own, personal email address for communications with the client.   The RMA could be unaware that their MARN is even being used in this manner.

Australian Registered Migration Agents went to university to gain qualifications,  increase their knowledge every year through professional development, maintain Professional Indemnity Insurance and a Professional Library each year.  They do not want to spend their time competing with unregistered persons who undercut them on price, and lodge half-baked or incorrect visa applications into the Australian systems.

All ideas would be greatly appreciated.  My plan is to continuously make submissions to Government. 

I am pushing for unregistered practice to cease in 2019.