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

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to cancel the applicant's Global Special Humanitarian (Class XB)(Subclass 202) visa. The applicant, RYZM, who was found to be a citizen of South Sudan, had his visa cancelled on the grounds that he had a substantial criminal record and was serving a sentence of full-time imprisonment. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether there was another reason to revoke this cancellation.

The Tribunal was tasked with considering various factors, including the primary considerations outlined in Direction No. 90, such as the protection of the Australian community from criminal or other serious conduct, family violence, the best interests of minor children in Australia, and the expectations of the Australian community. It also had to weigh other considerations, including international non-refoulement obligations, the extent of impediments to removal, the impact on victims, links to the Australian community, special considerations, and the prospect of prolonged detention. The Tribunal was also presented with two procedural matters: a late statement from a potential witness and the absence of a statement from the applicant.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal noted that while it was not confined solely to the listed considerations, any other articulated claim must be relevant to the scope and purpose of the Migration Act. The Tribunal extensively detailed RYZM's criminal history, which included numerous driving offences, theft, possession of weapons, affray, and violent conduct towards partners. It found that RYZM's conduct demonstrated a degree of premeditation and a pattern of offending despite prior interventions and a clear understanding of the likelihood of further imprisonment. Applying Direction No. 90, the Tribunal gave greater weight to the primary considerations, particularly the protection of the Australian community.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the discretion to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation was enlivened by any "another reason." Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the Minister's decision to cancel RYZM's visa.