Ezindu (Migration)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of Mr Ezindu, who sought review of the decision to cancel his Subclass 500 (Student) visa. The dispute arose from an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the grant of a cohort of student visas by the Department of Home Affairs' post in Pretoria, South Africa. The investigation revealed that departmental employees may have improperly bypassed procedures, leading to the grant of visas, including the applicant's, without adequate verification of documentation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was established, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel the visa should be exercised. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant was subject to a prescribed ground for cancellation under regulation 2.43 of the Migration Regulations 1994, which related to fraudulent conduct.

The Tribunal reasoned that the evidence, including departmental investigation reports, indicated that locally engaged staff in Pretoria had bypassed procedures and improperly granted visas. These reports, despite redactions, described a pattern of conduct where two officers facilitated the improper processing of student visa applications for Nigerian applicants. The Tribunal was satisfied that the ground for cancellation under section 116(1)(g) was made out. In exercising its discretion, the Tribunal considered the applicant's claims of being a genuine student, having spent his inheritance, and having an Australian de facto partner and child. While acknowledging some weight to his studies and financial expenditure, the Tribunal gave little weight to the unsupported claim of inheritance. It also noted that the formation of a domestic relationship in Australia did not negate the temporary nature of the visa.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 500 (Student) visa.