Seema Hewage (Migration)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a Student (Temporary) visa (Class TU), Subclass 500. The applicant, Seema Hewage, sought to challenge the decision made by the Department of Home Affairs. The review was heard by Member Wendy Banfield of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had satisfied the character requirements for the visa, specifically by providing a statement from an appropriate authority regarding her criminal history and a completed Form 80. The Department had requested police clearance certificates from all countries where the applicant had resided for 12 months or more in the preceding 10 years, including an updated Australian Federal Police certificate reflecting all names or aliases, particularly "Nimesha SILVA." The applicant was also requested to provide a completed Form 80.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided the requested police clearance certificate for China, despite having lived there for periods exceeding 12 months within the relevant timeframe. Furthermore, the applicant had not provided an updated Australian Federal Police certificate as requested, nor had she provided a police clearance certificate from any other country where she had resided for the requisite period. While the applicant submitted a Chinese Notarial Certificate, a statement regarding her inability to obtain a Chinese police clearance, court documents relating to an Intervention Order, a completed Form 80, and statutory declarations concerning name variations and her lack of serious convictions, these were not considered sufficient to meet the specific requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had failed to meet the requirements of regulation 2.03AA(2). The decision under review was affirmed, meaning the applicant was not granted the Student (Temporary) visa.