BNHW and Minister for Home Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by BNHW to have the cancellation of his visa revoked, with the Minister for Home Affairs as the respondent. The decision was made by Senior Member Dr Damien Cremean of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the strength, nature, and duration of BNHW's ties to Australia outweighed considerations arising from his criminal history, and whether international non-refoulement obligations required the revocation of the visa cancellation. BNHW had resided in Australia for over 20 years, but had been homeless for much of that period and had no evidence of ongoing contact with his family or any employment prospects upon release.

The Tribunal considered BNHW's extensive criminal history, including serious offending, and found that the Australian community was entitled to protection from such conduct. While acknowledging BNHW's ties to Australia, the Tribunal was not satisfied that these ties were sufficiently strong or substantial to outweigh the public interest in protection. The Tribunal also considered international non-refoulement obligations but concluded, applying principles from *Suleiman v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection* [2018] FCA 594, that these did not necessitate the revocation of the visa cancellation in this instance. The nature and seriousness of BNHW's offending were found to outweigh any considerations in his favour.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel BNHW's visa, finding that no consideration reasonably required the revocation of the cancellation.