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

This matter concerned an application by the Applicant to set aside a decision to refuse his visa, following a mandatory cancellation of his visa under section 501(3A) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) due to failing the character test. The Applicant did not dispute that he failed the character test, and the central issue before the Tribunal was whether there was "another reason" to revoke the mandatory cancellation. The Tribunal was presided over by Deputy President John Pascoe AC CVO.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether any "other reason" existed to revoke the mandatory visa cancellation, considering the factors outlined in Direction No. 99. This involved assessing the protection of the Australian community from the Applicant's conduct, the Applicant's links to the Australian community, the best interests of any minor children in Australia, the expectations of the Australian community, the legal consequences of the decision, and any impediments to the Applicant's removal from Australia.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's conduct, which included serious offences against vulnerable females, some involving minors, was extremely serious and unacceptable. Psychological assessments indicated an "above average" risk of reoffending, although the Tribunal noted that some protective factors, such as family support and completed courses, were not fully accounted for in the most recent assessment. While the Applicant presented evidence of strong family ties in Australia, including a close relationship with his nieces and nephews, and expressed genuine fear of returning to Liberia due to past trauma, these factors were weighed against the seriousness of his offending and the risk he posed to the community. The Tribunal gave neutral weight to the legal consequences of deportation, noting uncertainties beyond its remit, and found that while the Applicant would face considerable stress if removed to Liberia, this did not outweigh the primary consideration of protecting the Australian community.

Ultimately, the Tribunal determined that the seriousness of the Applicant's conduct and the risk of reoffending weighed heavily against revoking the visa cancellation. The reviewable decision to refuse the Applicant's visa was therefore affirmed.