SDCV and Director-General of Security

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an appeal by SDCV against a decision by the Director-General of Security to affirm a recommendation for the cancellation of SDCV's Partner visa. The Director-General's recommendation was based on an adverse security assessment, which concluded that SDCV posed a danger to the security of Australia. This assessment was informed by SDCV's ideology in support of politically motivated violence, including consuming extremist material online and expressing support for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Director-General's adverse security assessment was justified, and consequently, whether the recommendation for visa cancellation should be affirmed. This required the Tribunal to assess the evidence relating to SDCV's beliefs, online activities, and expressed support for ISIL, and to determine if these factors constituted a danger to Australia's security.

Deputy President Rayment Oam Qc P, in his reasoning, applied the principles of administrative review under the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (Cth) and the relevant provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning security assessments. The Tribunal considered the nature of the threat posed by extremist ideologies and the potential for individuals holding such views to engage in or facilitate politically motivated violence. The Tribunal found that SDCV's engagement with and support for ISIL, as evidenced by online activities and expressed views, met the threshold for posing a danger to the security of Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Director-General's decision and the recommendation for the cancellation of SDCV's Partner visa.