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

This matter concerned an application by NMQG, a United Kingdom citizen, for the non-revocation of a mandatory cancellation of his Class BF Transitional (Permanent) visa. The applicant did not pass the character test due to a substantial criminal record, which included convictions for trafficking in a dangerous drug. The Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs had decided not to revoke the cancellation, and the applicant sought review of this decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was "another reason" why the decision to cancel the applicant's visa should be revoked, considering Ministerial Direction No. 99. This involved assessing the applicant's risk of re-offending, taking into account his criminal history, rehabilitation efforts, and the potential harm to the Australian community. The Tribunal also had to consider the seriousness of the applicant's offending in light of the criteria set out in paragraph 8.1.1 of the Direction.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's completion of various rehabilitative courses and programs, including drug rehabilitation and a relapse prevention plan. While acknowledging these efforts as commendable steps taken in a controlled environment, the Tribunal found them insufficient to provide confidence that the applicant had comprehensively turned the corner and presented an acceptable recidivist risk. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's de-facto spouse was a co-offender in his most recent trafficking offence, diminishing the protective effect of his family support network. Applying paragraph 8.1.1(1)(a)(i) of the Direction, the Tribunal found the applicant's offending, which included violent offences, to be "very serious". Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant presented a real and unacceptable recidivist risk, and the evidence of his rehabilitation was not sufficiently comprehensive to ameliorate this risk.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Respondent's delegate made on 19 March 2024 to not revoke the mandatory cancellation of the applicant's visa.