Ronaki and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to revoke the cancellation of the Applicant's visa. The Applicant, a non-citizen, had his visa cancelled due to having a substantial criminal record. The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was another reason why the decision to cancel the visa should be revoked.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Applicant passed the character test, and if not, whether there were other reasons to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider the primary considerations outlined in Ministerial Direction No 65, including the protection of the Australian community, the best interests of minor children, and the expectations of the Australian community, as well as other considerations such as international non-refoulement obligations and the strength of ties to Australia.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant did not pass the character test as he had a substantial criminal record, defined by the Act as having been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months or more. In assessing whether to revoke the cancellation, the Tribunal gave significant weight to the primary considerations. It found that the Applicant had engaged in serious criminal conduct, including violence against women, and posed a real and present risk of reoffending. This was evidenced by his failure to appreciate the gravity of his offences, his pattern of violating legal processes, and his continued downplaying of his conduct. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the Australian community would not expect the Applicant to remain in Australia, and these primary considerations weighed strongly against revocation. Other considerations, such as his ties to Australia and impact on family, were given less weight.

The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to revoke the cancellation of the Applicant's visa.