MRT - RRT Annual Report 2007-08

Australian Government - Migration Review Tribunal - Refugee Review TribunalMigration Review Tribunal - Refugee Review Tribunal Annual Report 2007-2008Migration Review Tribunal - Refugee Review Tribunal Annual Report 2007-2008
< Previous page | Contents | Next page > Reduce the font sizeIncrease the font sizeReset the font sizePrint

Part 3-The role of the Tribunals

Contents

The Migration Review Tribunal (MRT) and the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) are statutory bodies providing a final, independent merits review of visa and visa-related decisions made by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship or by officers of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, acting as delegates of the Minister.

The Tribunals are established under the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunals' jurisdictions, powers and procedures are set out in the Migration Act and the Migration Regulations 1994. The Tribunals comprise Members (appointed by the Governor-General under the Migration Act for fixed terms) and staff (appointed under the Migration Act and employed under the Public Service Act 1999).

All Members and staff are cross-appointed to both Tribunals and the Tribunals operate as a single agency for the purposes of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997.

The MRT reviews a wide range of decisions in relation to visas other than protection visas. The RRT reviews decisions in relation to protection visas.

A visa is required by anyone who is not an Australian citizen and who wishes to travel to, or remain in, Australia. The Migration Act and the Migration Regulations set out the criteria for visas. There are usually criteria specific to a visa, as well as general criteria such as those relating to health and character.

A visa may be refused if a decision-maker is not satisfied that a person covered by the application meets the criteria for the visa. A visa may be cancelled if, for example, it was obtained by making false statements or if the visa holder has not abided by the conditions of the visa.

The Tribunals are required to provide a mechanism of review that is fair, just, economical, informal and quick.

Merits review

Merits review is an administrative reconsideration of a case. The principal objective of merits review is to ensure that the correct or preferable decision is reached on the facts before the review body. The decision and reasons of the review body should also improve the general quality and consistency of decision making, and enhance openness and accountability of the particular area of government decision making.

The Tribunals make decisions within the same legislative framework as the primary decision-maker, and may exercise all the powers and discretions conferred on the primary decision-maker, in addition to the Tribunals' specific powers.

The Tribunals reconsider each case in light of the facts before them, the law and Government policy (to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the law).

The Tribunals have the power to affirm the primary decision, vary the primary decision, set aside the primary decision and substitute a new decision, or remit (return) a matter to the Department for reconsideration with specific directions. For example, a matter may be 'remitted' if a Member is satisfied that a visa applicant meets one or more of the requirements for the visa. The Department may then need to undertake further processing in relation to other requirements for the visa.

Applying for review

The Migration Act and the Migration Regulations specify which decisions the Tribunals can review, who may seek a review, how an application for review must be made, the time limits within which applications for review must be lodged and whether an application fee is payable. The rules vary depending on the type of matter.

The Tribunals cannot accept an application for review which has been lodged outside the relevant time limit or which has been lodged by a person who is not entitled to apply for review. Depending on the decision under review, the person applying for review must be the visa applicant, the former visa holder, the sponsor or a close relative.

The time limits for lodging an application to the MRT vary from 2 working days for some immigration detention cases to 7 working days for cancellation decisions and other immigration detention cases, 21 calendar days for other cases where the visa applicant is in Australia, and 70 calendar days for cases where the visa applicant is outside Australia. A fee of $1,400 is payable for all MRT applications other than for the review of decisions to refuse to grant or to cancel a bridging visa in relation to a person in immigration detention. Payment of the fee may be waived if payment would cause severe financial hardship.

The time limits for lodging an application to the RRT are 7 working days for persons in immigration detention, and 28 calendar days for all other cases. There is no application fee when applying to the RRT, but a $1,400 fee becomes payable if the Tribunal affirms the primary decision.

The MRT and RRT application forms contain detailed information about lodging an application for review, who can apply for review and the time limits. These are available from the Tribunals' website or from the Tribunals' registries.

Form M1 is the general MRT application form. Form M2 is the MRT application form for persons in immigration detention. Form R1 is the RRT application form.

The MRT deals with large numbers of partner visa cases. In many cases, the relationship had only existed for a short time at the time of the primary decision. At the time of the MRT's decision there is often further information to consider.

Anne lives in Melbourne with her daughter. She planned to have a holiday to Turkey and used the Internet to establish some local contacts. She met Mehmet through a dating site on the Internet and they moved from exchanging messages to regularly talking by phone. Anne arranged to meet Mehmet, and they married 3 weeks after she arrived in Turkey.

Mehmet's application for a visa to Australia was refused as the delegate was not satisfied that the relationship was genuine. The delegate noted that Mehmet's family had not attended the wedding, that it was unusual in Turkey for a man to marry a woman who is 10 years older and divorced and that there were some inconsistencies and a lack of documentary evidence. Anne applied to the MRT for a review of the decision.

Anne attended the MRT hearing and Mehmet gave evidence by telephone. Both talked at length about their relationship and their plans. Anne said that she had met Mehmet's family the week before the civil ceremony. The ceremony was arranged at short notice before she had to return to Australia and the intention was to have a larger ceremony at a later date.

In finding that Mehmet should be granted a visa, the Member noted that Anne had subsequently been back to Turkey on 3 occasions and had spent more than 3 months with Mehmet. There was also documentary evidence of daily phone contact.

The conduct of reviews

RRT reviews are conducted by a single Member. MRT reviews are usually constituted by a single Member. The Tribunals' procedures are designed to provide a review process which is fair and just, and to ensure that an applicant can fully put his or her case.

An applicant is entitled to:

  • be informed of, and be given an opportunity to comment upon, adverse information;
  • appear before the Tribunal to give oral evidence and present arguments on the issues arising in the review;
  • make written submissions or provide documentary evidence;
  • ask the Tribunal to take oral evidence from other persons; and
  • be provided with a written statement of reasons for the decision.

Unless a favourable decision can be made on the papers, an applicant must be invited to a hearing. The hearing is an opportunity for the applicant to appear before the Tribunal to give oral evidence and present arguments on the issues arising in the review. The applicant may arrange for other persons to attend the hearing to give evidence and may be accompanied to the hearing by a friend, relative or other support person.

Hearings are usually held in person at the Tribunals' offices, but may be held in other places or through video or telephone links. The Migration Act requires that proceedings of the MRT be generally open to the public. The Migration Act requires all proceedings of the RRT to be held in private. An interpreter is engaged if a person is not sufficiently proficient in English.

Hearings are inquisitorial in nature and the Member takes an active role in asking questions of the persons appearing before the Tribunal.

An applicant may appoint a representative to assist with his or her case. A representative can forward written submissions and written evidence to the Tribunals, contact the Tribunals on the applicant's behalf and may accompany the applicant to any meeting or hearing arranged by the Tribunals. At a hearing, the Member will ordinarily invite a representative to present arguments or submissions or to make comments on specific matters. With very limited exceptions, only a registered migration agent may provide immigration assistance.

The Minister or the Department is not represented in Tribunal proceedings, but the Department may provide written submissions.

A significant proportion of applicants are not represented and the Tribunals' procedures, and the information available for applicants, are aimed at assisting applicants who proceed without representation.

The Member may in some cases make an oral decision at the end of a hearing. In all cases, the Member is required to provide a written decision statement, setting out findings and reasons.

The MRT and the RRT are required to publish decisions that are considered to be of 'particular interest'.
In determining what is of particular interest, the Tribunals take account of the views of representatives and others interested in the work of the Tribunals. The requirement to publish decisions is subject to certain restrictions. The identity of applicants and relatives cannot be disclosed when publishing RRT decisions, and a Member may decide that publication of an MRT decision is to be restricted on public interest grounds. If a restriction applies, the decision to be published is edited so as not to contain the information which cannot be published. Published decisions are available on the AustLII website at http://www.austlii.edu.au/.

The RRT deals with cases where doubts may arise whether the claims made by applicants are true. These are particularly difficult cases where Members have to make a decision largely based on the applicant's claims and evidence, taking into account factors which may affect the consistency and detail of the evidence given by the applicant.

Ms Z is a Chinese citizen who travelled to Australia as a tourist. After her visitor visa expired, she applied for a protection (refugee) visa. She said her mother had been a Christian and that she had become involved with a group of Christians which met in private homes after she and her husband had divorced. She said that she and other members of the group had been detained and tortured for a week in 2004. She and her daughter had subsequently moved to another city where she had not come to the attention of authorities but where she had no freedom to be a Christian. She had received assistance from other Christians to travel to Australia. Her daughter remained in China and had been placed in a boarding school.

The delegate interviewed Ms Z and was not satisfied that she had been detained or that she would be persecuted if she returned to China. The delegate noted that Ms Z had travelled to Malaysia previously and did not appear to have had any problems leaving or returning to China. The protection visa was refused and Ms Z applied to the RRT.

Ms Z told the Tribunal Member about her experiences in China and her religious beliefs. She said that she had never attended any church services in China as all churches were controlled by the government. She said that she did not know there were underground churches.

At the hearing, and subsequently in writing, the Member advised Ms Z that he had doubts about whether she was a Christian and whether she had been involved in religious activities in China, or had been detained by the authorities. He asked why she had not mentioned at any earlier stage her evidence that her mother was being harassed by police seeking to find her and that she had been preaching in China.

Ms Z responded by saying that she is a committed Christian. She said that while she did not attend church regularly, she read the Bible and prayed every day. She said she suffered memory problems following her detention and had found it difficult to answer the Member's questions about her beliefs. She said she did not preach like a pastor but spread the Gospel by simply telling people to love Jesus Christ.

In affirming the delegate's decision, the Member found that that Ms Z did not have a genuine interest in Christianity and that she had made up claims in order to obtain residency in Australia.

Decision making

Members are required to conduct an independent review and to reach an independent decision on the case. A Member must apply the correct law and is bound by relevant court decisions. A decision made by a Member in one case does not bind Members in other cases. However, consistency is highly desirable and it is generally expected that a decision in a particular case would be consistent with other lawful decisions in like matters.

Members need to maintain knowledge of changes in relevant legislation, country information, case law and policy, and regularly attend and participate in professional development activities, conferences, training courses and peer discussions. The Tribunals place a high priority on the sharing of information across the organisation, primarily through the Tribunals' intranet, the delivery of professional development and training and promoting discussion of issues between Members at national and local levels.

The Legal Services Section provides Members with relevant, current and authoritative legal information, and updates, organises and indexes holdings of information for maximum accessibility. Legal officers are available to provide oral and written advice to Members on case specific and migration, refugee and administrative law issues.

The Research and Information Section provides Members with relevant, current and authoritative country and general information. Research officers respond to queries from Members, and also update, organise and index holdings of information for maximum accessibility. Generally, all country and general information used in decision making must be able to be cited and made publicly available.

An important resource is information provided by overseas missions of the Department of Foreign Affairs
and Trade.

Members have access to a wide range of information available in the Tribunals' library, to Government, intergovernmental and non-government sources of country information; and to specialist journals and international newswire services. All Members have electronic access to a range of external and internal information products, including:

  • consolidations of migration legislation, Ministerial directions, legislative instruments and Departmental policy manuals;
  • commentaries on legislative amendments and court cases;
  • a database of relevant court decisions;
  • a database of all Tribunal decisions;
  • all Tribunal policies, procedures, guidelines and advices; and
  • databases containing country research information and legal commentary; including the Department's CISNET country information database.

Matters reviewed by the MRT

The MRT can review decisions relating to a wide range of visas. Reviewable decisions include decisions to refuse to grant visas, to cancel visas, to refuse to approve sponsors, and to refuse to approve a nominated position or business activity.

Bridging visas are granted to provide temporary lawful status to non-citizens in Australia, for example while a temporary entrant is awaiting the outcome of an application for permanent residence. Visitor visas are granted to tourists and to persons visiting relatives in Australia. Student visas are granted to persons enrolled at schools, colleges and universities in Australia. Temporary business visas are granted for four years to persons whose proposed employment or business activities will contribute to the creation or maintenance of employment within Australia, the expansion of Australian trade, an improvement in links with international markets and/or greater competitiveness in the economy.

Permanent business visas are granted to successful business people who obtain a substantial ownership interest in a new or existing business in Australia and actively participate in that business at a senior management level. Skilled visas are granted to persons in skilled occupations who have the education, skills and employability to contribute to the Australian economy.

Partner visas are granted to partners of Australian citizens or permanent residents. Family visas are granted to children, parents, remaining relatives (persons who have limited family contacts other than relatives living in Australia), aged dependent relatives (elderly overseas relatives who have been financially supported by a close Australian relative for a reasonable period) and carers (persons who are able and willing to provide assistance needed by a relative in Australia).

A typical hearing room. The Tribunals conducted 5,049 hearings during the year. Most hearings are held in person. Video conferencing was used for 14% of hearings.

A typical hearing room. The Tribunals conducted 5,049 hearings during the year.
Most hearings are held in person. Video conferencing was used for 14% of hearings.

Matters reviewed by the RRT

The RRT reviews decisions made within Australia to refuse to grant or to cancel protection visas. The review of these decisions usually involves a consideration of whether or not the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations. This involves consideration of whether he or she is a 'refugee' within the meaning of the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (as amended by the 1967 UN Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees) (the Convention).

The Convention was drafted between 1948 and 1951 with the principal aim of creating a regime to cope with the large numbers of people who had been displaced by the Second World War. The original definition permitted a person to be declared a refugee as a result of events occurring in Europe before 1 January 1951. However, the 1967 UN Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (the Protocol) removed the time and geographical limitation in the Convention's definition of a refugee. The Convention now extends to all persons who are refugees because of events occurring at any time in any place. Australia became a signatory to the Refugees Convention in 1954 and to the Protocol in 1973.

The term 'refugee' is defined in Chapter 1, Article 1 of the Convention. In particular, Article 1A(2) of the Convention, as amended by the Protocol, defines a refugee as a person who:

... owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it ...

Other provisions of the Convention may be relevant to an assessment of the entitlement to a protection visa.

A number of provisions of the Migration Act expressly qualify certain aspects of the Convention. These provisions focus principally on the concepts of persecution and the nature and seriousness of certain crimes relevant to the determination of whether Australia has protection obligations to an asylum seeker. Many aspects of the Convention, however, are not specifically defined by the legislation and must be interpreted in accordance with established legal principles.

Vision, purpose and values

The Tribunals provide an independent and final merits review of decisions. The review must be fair, just, economical, informal and quick. We seek to treat all those with whom we deal with courtesy, respect and dignity.

The Tribunals' Plan, Member Code of Conduct, Service Charter and Interpreters' Handbook promote these values. All of these documents are available on the Tribunals' website. Staff are also bound by the Australian Public Service Values and Code of Conduct, as set out in the Public Service Act.

Membership as at 30 June 2008

Denis O'Brien

Principal Member

Mary Urquhart

RRT Deputy Principal Member and A/g MRT Senior Member

 

Rea Hearn Mackinnon

Senior Member

VIC

Mary Urquhart

RRT Deputy Principal Member and A/g MRT Senior Member

VIC

Bruce MacCarthy

Senior Member

NSW

Irene O'Connell

A/g Senior Member

NSW

Giles Short

Senior Member

NSW

 

Full-time Members

Full-time Members

Full-time Members

Full-time Members

Full-time Members

Paul Fisher

George Haddad

Rosa Gagliardi

Antoinette Younes

Ann Duffield

Bronwyn Forsyth

Shahyar Roushan

Part-time Members

Part-time Members

Part-time Members

Part-time Members

Part-time Members

John Atkins

Danica Buljan

Nicole Burns

Mary Cameron

Tim Connellan

Jennifer Ellis

Adolfo Gentile

Genevieve Hamilton

Megan Hodgkinson

Diane Hubble

Deborah Jordan

Peter Katsambanis

Kay Kirmos

Gary Ledson

Dominic Lennon

David Mitchell

Noel Pullen

Greg Robinson

Louise Spieler

David Thomas

Irene Tsiakas

Wendy Boddison

Bernadette Cremean

Alan Gregory

Deborah Morgan

Sydelle Muling

Karen Synon

Peter Tyler

Lisa Ward

David Young

Diane Barnetson

Samuel Blay

Catherine Carney

John Cipolla

Sue Crosdale

Gabrielle Cullen

Johnathon Duignan

Luke Hardy

Rodney Inder

Christine Long

Susannah McNeil

Andrew Mullin

Ann O'Toole

Pauline Pope

Phillippa Wearne

Robert Wilson

Hugh Wyndham

Jennifer Ciantar

David Connolly

Richard Derewlany

Dione Dimitriadis

David Dobell

Namoi Dougall

Kerry-Anne Hartman

Ricky Johnston

Jane Marquard

Louise Nicholls

Steve Norman

Christopher Packer

Susan Pinto

Don Smyth

Linda Symons

Bronwyn Connolly

Michael Cooke

Angela Cranston

Ted Delofski

Suseela Durvasula

Mary-Anne Ford

Mila Foster

Andrew Jacovides

Suzanne Leal

Patricia Leehy

Amanda MacDonald

Wendy Machin

Rosemary Mathlin

Philippa McIntosh

Lilly Mojsin

Kira Raif

James Silva

Staff Organisational Chart as at 30 June 2008

Organisational Chart

 

Back to top
  < Previous page | Contents | Next page > Reduce the font sizeIncrease the font sizeReset the font sizePrint