Jama and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Jama, a New Zealand citizen, for review of a delegate's decision not to revoke the mandatory cancellation of his Class TY Subclass 444 Special Category (Temporary) visa. Mr Jama's visa was cancelled under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) due to his failure to pass the character test, stemming from a conviction for aggravated armed robbery for which he received a sentence of four years' imprisonment. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to consider whether there was "another reason" to revoke this cancellation decision, having regard to Ministerial Direction No. 99.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine whether, in accordance with section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Act and Ministerial Direction No. 99, there existed another reason to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation. This required the Tribunal to stand in the shoes of the original decision-maker and assess all relevant factors, including those weighing for and against revocation, as at the time of its own consideration. The Tribunal was also guided by the Full Federal Court's decision in *Bettencourt v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs* regarding the application of the Direction.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on applying the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 99, which mandates consideration of various factors when assessing whether to revoke a visa cancellation. While acknowledging the seriousness of Mr Jama's index offence and his failure to pass the character test, the Tribunal also considered evidence presented regarding his rehabilitation, his ties to the Australian community, and the potential impact of cancellation on his family. After weighing these competing considerations, the Tribunal was satisfied that there was another reason to revoke the original visa cancellation decision.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted it with a decision revoking the mandatory cancellation of Mr Jama's visa.