1732212 (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered a decision to cancel the Subclass 202 (Global Special Humanitarian) visa granted to the first named applicant. The dispute arose from allegations that the applicant, and by extension her husband, provided incorrect information in their respective visa applications concerning the whereabouts of the applicant's husband between 2008 and 2014.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had failed to comply with the requirements of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by providing incorrect answers in her visa application or related forms, thereby giving the Minister grounds to cancel her visa under section 109 of the Act. This involved determining whether the applicant's explanation for the discrepancies in her husband's reported movements was credible and whether her son, who sponsored her application as an unaccompanied minor, had acted in good faith.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant, as a single Hazara woman from Afghanistan, would have faced significant obstacles in searching for her missing husband in Kabul during the period in question, particularly given the general vulnerability of internally displaced persons and the specific risks faced by Hazaras. It accepted the evidence of the applicant's son that he believed his father to be missing, presumed dead, at the time of the visa application and would have included him if he had known otherwise. Consequently, the Tribunal found no non-compliance by the applicant as alleged in the notice issued under section 107 of the Act.

The Tribunal set aside the decision to cancel the first named applicant's visa and substituted a decision not to cancel it. The Tribunal also noted that it had no jurisdiction concerning the secondary applicants.