GKQK and Minister for Home Affairs (Migration)

The applicant, GKQK, sought judicial review of the Minister for Home Affairs' decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his visa on character grounds. The dispute centred on whether the discretion to revoke the cancellation should have been exercised, considering the applicant's criminal history and the relevant considerations outlined in Direction 79. The matter was heard by Theodore Tavoularis SM.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant's offending conduct, particularly its escalating seriousness and frequency, warranted the revocation of the mandatory visa cancellation. This involved assessing the applicant's criminal history, the nature and seriousness of his past conduct, and the risk he posed to the Australian community should he commit further offences. The court also had to consider the cumulative effect of his repeated offending and whether any rationalisations for his behaviour could be accepted.

The court reasoned that the applicant's criminal history, spanning from 2000 to 2016, demonstrated a clear escalation in the seriousness of his offences, culminating in significant drug trafficking and related charges for which he received a six-year term of imprisonment. The court found that this offending could not be regarded as anything other than serious, particularly given the sentencing judge's comments highlighting the applicant's principal role in a commercial drug enterprise and the inherent harm caused by such activities. The court concluded that the cumulative effect of the applicant's offending demonstrated a lack of respect for Australian law and authority, making it impossible to exercise the discretion to revoke the visa cancellation.

Accordingly, the decision under review was affirmed, meaning the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa was not revoked.