Processing times for Partner visa applications are increasing. The Australian Government has allocated 39,799 places for partner visas in the financial year 2019-20, the same allocation as the previous financial year. For the 2018-19 financial year, there is an identified backlog of over 80,000 partner visa applications for overseas-born people who are married to or intend to marry Australian citizens or permanent residents. As a result of static allocations and a large backlog, processing times are expected to increase with most visa applications now taking two years or more to decide.
The following announcement has appeared on the Administrative Appeals Tribunal website. The AAT is currently seeking feedback from applicants, representatives and other parties who were involved in a case that was finalised by the AAT between 1 December 2018 and 30 March 2019. If you are part of this group you may receive an email or SMS invitation to complete a short and anonymous online survey. The survey will give the AAT important information about users’ opinions on the overall review process and their experience when dealing with the AAT. The AAT will use the information to identify areas where we can make improvements. All survey responses will be treated as confidential. Key survey results will be included in our 2018-19 Annual Report. The survey closes 30 May 2019.
The following announcement on an upcoming seminar on the Significant Investor stream of the Subclass 188 (Business Innovation and Investment (Provisional)) visa has been published on the Business and Skilled Migration Queensland website. Significant Investor Visa (SIV) Seminar 29 May 2019 Moelis Australia and Business and Skilled Migration Queensland invite registered migration agents, immigration lawyers and migrants interested in the Business Innovation and Investment (Provisional) visa (subclass 188) Significant Investor stream to a seminar on this stream. The event is free of charge and there are strictly limited places available. Speakers are: Enda Stankard, Executive Director, Moelis Australia Greg McKean, Manager, Business and Skilled Migration Queensland Topics include: Update on the SIV program SIV statistics to date Moelis SIV complying investments including Queensland investments Applying for Queensland Government SIV nomination Event date and time: The event will be held on Wednesday 29 May 2019 from 4.00pm – 7.00pm (registration from 3.30pm) and will be followed by an informal drinks reception and networking event. RSVP: kate.mcleod@moelisaustralia.com (numbers are strictly limited) Venue: Level 41, 1 William Street, Brisbane QLD 4000 Invitation here
The second edition of The Administration of the Immigration Program has been released by the Department of Home Affairs. The paper has been produced to help external stakeholders understand how the Department of Home Affairs administers Australia’s Immigration Program. It includes the Australian Government’s views on responding to Australia’s increased connection to the world and the movement of people, detection of threats within the Migration program, delivering improved immigration integrity and future administration of the immigration program. The paper is available at https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/programs-subsite/files/administration-immigration-program.pdf
The following information on skilled migration has been published on the Canberra Your Future website. Canberra Matrix – Invitation round Invitation date: 8 May 2019 Number of invitations issued: 225 Matrix score range: All Matrix submitted with 135 to 70 points; 65 point Matrix submitted on or before 31 March 2019 The next invitation round will be held on or before 24 May 2019.
Thousands of individuals have been found to possess fake academic credentials and have been employed as doctors, nurses, teachers and engineers in South-East Asia, including Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, and also Canada. Online websites which have alleged links to a Pakistani based IT software company, Axact have been providing individuals with fake academic credentials. A recent New York Times investigation identified more than 370 websites associated with Axact’s alleged fake diploma operations, including 145 sites for fictitious universities, 41 for high schools, 18 for fake accreditation boards, and 121 degree portals. After media reports exposed how Axact’s network appeared to be profiting from bogus degrees, the company’s founder, Shoaib Ahmed Shaikh, was arrested and charged with fraud in September 2018. Police raids at the company’s headquarters in Karachi found lists of fake universities, blank degree certificates, names and phone numbers of their customers and call recordings of Axact staff trying to extract money from them. There are now fears that thousands of people worldwide who have bought fake degrees are working in professions where extensive training and knowledge is critical. Some of them then use these fake qualifications to obtain jobs as doctors, teachers and engineers. An estimated one in 20 potential hires in Malaysia has fake qualifications while one in 10 has credentials from unaccredited institutions. Though no Australian visa holders have yet been identified, hundreds of people working as professionals in diverse fields across Canada have been identified as possessing fake academic credentials connected to Axact.
Coles and Woolworths are facing pressure to boycott suppliers linked to the exploitation of migrant workers, amid a push to address ongoing issues within the labour hire industry. The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) has raised concerns with both supermarkets about the accreditation of labour-hire providers in their domestic supply chains. There are concerns the supermarkets are continuing trade with labour hire providers found to have violated Fair Work laws. Under Woolworths’ policies, a labour-hire provider must be accredited through one of three systems: the state licensing system for labour hire; be considered an approved employer on the Australian Government’s Seasonal Worker Programme; or be accredited by the certification scheme, StaffSure. The ACCR named Brisbane-based company Agri Labour Australia as one of several companies linked to claims of underpayment and poor working conditions. Last week, Agri Labour Australia Pty Ltd was forced to pay $50,823 to 19 Vanuatu nationals, who were employed under the Seasonal Worker Programme between December 2017 and April 2018. Despite the revelations, the company still has a working relationship with retailers who supply to Woolworths, is still licensed by the Queensland Government and certified by StaffSure. It is not however listed as an approved employer on the Australian Government’s Seasonal Worker Programme.
Two men with Indigenous heritage, but who were both born overseas, could be deported after they failed a migration character test, depending on the outcome of a High Court case which began on 8 May 2019. The Australian Government’s policy to deport an increasing number of people under the character test provisions has raised numerous complications for Indigenous people and those born in PNG before its independence in 1975. The two men in the separate High Court cases have at least one parent who is Indigenous and holds Australian citizenship. They both have Indigenous children, and one is a native title holder. However, neither formally applied for Australia citizenship and, after being convicted of ‘serious’ crimes and given jail sentences of 12 months or more, both had their visas cancelled under the government’s character test provisions. The High Court is now being asked to determine if an Aboriginal Australian in the men’s circumstances is an “alien” for the purposes of the Constitution. It is the first time the Court has been asked to rule on the commonwealth’s use of its alien powers in this way. In submissions to the Court, the men’s lawyers argued that Indigenous people “cannot be alien to Australia” and were “beyond the reach” of that constitutional power. The Australian government has submitted that whether the men were Indigenous or native title holders was “irrelevant” to the question of their alien status. They have said it was an agreed fact that neither plaintiff was a citizen and that “non-citizen” was the same as “alien”. Legal arguments began on Wednesday, with the government citing the High Court’s section 44 ruling on MPs with Australian citizenship concerns, and the men’s lawyers citing significant cases including the Mabo decision and the High Court ruling on a Papua-born man who was an Australian citizen by birth but who could be treated as an alien.
What is a Section 48 Bar? Section 48 of the Migration Act 1958 imposes limitations if the applicant’s substantive visa has been refused or cancelled while in Australia or the applicant does not currently hold a substantive visa. This provision (the s48 bar) prevents them from applying for most other Australian visas while in Australia and can have ramifications on their ability to remain in Australia legally. Section 48| Migration Act 1958 Section 48 Non-citizen refused a visa or whose visa is cancelled may only apply for particular visas (1) A non-citizen in the migration zone who: (a) does not hold a substantive visa; and (b) after last entering Australia: (i) was refused a visa, other than a refusal of a bridging visa or a refusal under section 501, 501A or 501B, for which the non-citizen had applied (whether or not the application has been finally determined); or (ii) held a visa that was cancelled under section 109 (incorrect information), 116 (general power to cancel), 133A (Minister’s personal powers to cancel visas on section 109 grounds), 133C (Minister’s personal powers to cancel visas on section 116 grounds), 134 (business visas), 137J (student visas) or 137Q(regional sponsored employment visas); may, subject to the regulations, apply for a visa of a class prescribed for the purposes of this section or have an application for such a visa made on his or her behalf, but not for a visa of any other class. The s48 bar is only imposed when the applicant is in Australia. If the applicant is subject to the s48 bar, they can still apply for a limited number of substantive visas while onshore. These include: Child visas Partner visas Protection, Territorial Asylum or Border visas Medical treatment visas Bridging visas Resolution of Status visas The s48 bar will not apply if the applicant applies for a visa, does not meet the valid visa application criteria for whatever reason and the visa application is subsequently not considered or invalid. For eg. An incorrect departmental fee has been paid. Bridging Visa B If the applicant is on a Bridging Visa B and the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) has refused the substantive visa application, the applicant will not be able to get around the section 48 bar by leaving and re-entering Australia and making a new substantive visa application when they intend to return. The Department considers the applicant to be continuously residing in Australia despite any international travel. Review Rights If the government has refused or cancelled the visa and section 48 applies, the applicant may be able to appeal the decision in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The s48 bar does not prevent the applicant from departing Australia and applying for a subsequent visa. Getting Assistance If you need immigration advice and/or assistance, please ensure you speak to OMARA, or you can contact us with your query. At McKkrs, we provide CPD classes for RMAs and lawyers practicing migration law and would be happy to assist you where possible. Please contact us on (02) 4626 1002 or simply email us at admin@mckkrs.com.au.
Public interest criterion 4020 (“PIC 4020”) is particularly important for migration agents to understand. This visa criterion aims to prevent applicants providing false, misleading or fraudulent information in the process of applying for a visa. This does not necessarily have to be intentional; you could violate this criterion without meaning to. PIC 4020 can also impact the lodgement of future visa applications, so a risky move or a mistake may have serious, ongoing implications— whether you are an applicant or an agent. What visas are affected? PIC 4020 is a criterion which applies to most Australian visas including skilled, business, temporary, family and student visas. But it doesn’t just apply to the particular visa you are applying for at the time: it may apply in relation to a visa application or a visa that the applicant has held in the period of 12 months before the visa application is made. What is false and misleading information? If you submit information as part of a visa application, it will only be deemed false and misleading if it is false at the time it was given, and not if events transpire such that it later becomes false. It must also be information relevant to the making of the decision—whether or not the decision actually turns on that information. Examples of false or misleading information include: False or inaccurate statements, such as falsified work references; Omission of facts, such as not disclosing that a sponsor for a work visa is a relative; or Supplying false statements or information when asked to clarify information or omitting relevant information in a way that misrepresents facts, such as deliberately answering questions from the Department of Home Affairs incorrectly. What is a bogus document? A bogus document is one which has been altered form the original issued version, fraudulent, or obtained under false pretences. Examples of bogus documents may include: fake passports; fake birth certificates; doctored academic transcripts; or photo shopped images. Not being able to provide sufficient, valid supporting documentation can be a reason for a refusal of the lodged visa. Waiver There is an option for to apply for a waiver of this criterion, if you believe the applicant may not be able to satisfy the Department of you identity or if there have been ineligible documents submitted with their application. However, the Department will only grant a waiver in compelling or compassionate circumstances which affects Australian citizens or eligible New Zealanders. Non-grant periods A refusal under PIC 4020 grounds can have serious implications for the applicant and his family. If the visa is refused on these grounds, the applicant may be barred from re-entry to Australia on a visa for which PIC 4020 is a criterion for three years. If the applicant then fails to satisfy an officer of his identity, this may increase to ten years. What’s more, anyone listed as a member of the family unit may also be refused a visa. You as an agent may face these consequences if you submit bogus or misleading documents on behalf of the applicant to help his case. Getting Assistance If you need immigration advice and/or assistance, please ensure you speak to OMARA, or you can contact us with your query. At McKkrs, we provide CPD classes for RMAs and lawyers practicing migration law and would be happy to assist you where possible. Please contact us on (02) 4626 1002 or simply email us at admin@mckkrs.com.au.