MQKW and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)

This matter concerned an application by MQKW (the applicant) to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of a mandatory visa cancellation decision made by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The applicant, a Malaysian national, had entered Australia in 2015 and his student visa was cancelled in March 2017. The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation decision should be revoked, pursuant to section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

The Tribunal was tasked with considering the relevant primary and other considerations as outlined in the Direction, specifically focusing on the protection of the Australian community. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of the applicant's conduct to date, including his criminal history and drug use, and the risk to the community should he re-offend. The Tribunal was also required to consider factors such as the frequency and seriousness of offending, the cumulative effect of repeated offending, and whether false or misleading information had been provided to the Department.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that the applicant's offences, which involved the sale and distribution of illicit drugs between September and November 2019, were serious. It noted that methylamphetamine is a serious drug with significant health consequences for users and associated criminal activity, and that even small quantities of supply can have a deleterious impact on the community. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's history of drug use, which had led to him losing his job and inability to study, and his admission of selling drugs to support his habit. Despite the applicant's claims of abstinence since his incarceration in December 2019, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the character test, and therefore section 501CA(4)(b)(i) could not be invoked.

The Tribunal ultimately found that there was no "another reason" why the mandatory visa cancellation decision should be revoked under section 501CA(4)(b)(ii) of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to cancel the applicant's visa.