Bills Digest no. 30 2015–16
PDF version [665KB]
WARNING: This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the Bill.
Elibritt Karlsen
Law and Bills Digest Section
13 October 2015
Contents
Purpose
of the Bill
Committee consideration
Policy position of non-government parties/independents
Position of major interest groups
Financial implications
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
Key issues and provisions
Date introduced: 16
September 2015
House: House of
Representatives
Portfolio: Immigration
and Border Protection
Commencement: Sections
1 to 3 commence upon Royal Assent. Part 1 of Schedule 3 commences on 25
September 2014. All other provisions commence the day after Royal Assent.
Links: The links to the Bill,
its Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be found on the
Bill’s home page, or through the Australian
Parliament website.
When Bills have been passed and have received Royal Assent, they
become Acts, which can be found at the ComLaw
website.
The purpose of the Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment
Bill (No. 1) 2015 (the Bill) is to amend the Migration Act 1958
to:[1]
- ensure
that when an unlawful non-citizen is in the process of being removed to another
country and the removal is aborted, or the person does not enter the other
country, and is thus returned to Australia, then that person has a lawful basis
to return to Australia without a visa (items 1–2 of Schedule 1)
- ensure
that when such a person returns to Australia they will be taken to have been
continuously in the migration zone so that they will be precluded from making a
valid application for certain visas (items 3–8 of Schedule 1)
- improve
consistency in the character related provisions, following recent amendments to
the Migration Act (Schedule 2)
- provide
that the events described in sections 82, 173 and 174 of the Migration Act
that cause a visa that is in effect to cease will, as a general rule, cause a
visa that is held, but not in effect, to be taken to cease (items 5–8
of Schedule 3)
- clarify
that a person who has previously been refused a protection visa application
that was made on their behalf cannot make a further protection visa application
(items 1–2 of Schedule 3), and
- ensure
that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) can review certain character or
security based decisions to refuse to grant a protection visa to a ‘fast track
applicant’ (items 3 and 9–11 of Schedule 3).[2]
The Bill will also amend the Maritime Powers Act 2013
to:[3]
- confirm
that powers under the Maritime Powers Act are able to be exercised in
the course of passage through or above the waters of another country in a
manner consistent with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (Schedule 4).[4]
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation
Committee
The Bill has been referred to the Senate Legal and
Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 10
November 2015. Details of the inquiry are at the inquiry webpage.[5]
At time of writing six submissions had been received by the Committee. Submitters
generally reiterated their continued opposition to recent amendments to the Migration
Act (discussed in greater detail below) which this Bill will reinforce.
Additional views are canvassed below under the heading ‘Key issues and
provisions’.
Senate Standing Committee for the
Scrutiny of Bills
At time of writing, the Committee had not considered the
Bill.
Neither non-government parties nor independents appear to have
publicly expressed a position with respect to the Bill.
This Bill is unlikely to generate considerable controversy
as it largely makes minor amendments to the existing legal framework.
The Explanatory Memorandum notes that the amendments will
have a low financial impact.[6]
As required under Part 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth), the Government has assessed the
Bill’s compatibility with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of that Act. The
Government considers that the Bill is compatible.[7]
Parliamentary Joint Committee on
Human Rights
At time of writing, the Committee had not considered the
Bill.
Schedule 1 – Amendments relating to
removal
The amendments contained in item 2 are designed to ‘ensure
that when an unlawful non-citizen is in the process of being removed to another
country and before they enter the other country, the person is returned to
Australia, then that person has a lawful basis to return to Australia without a
visa’.[8]
Item 2 amends existing section 42 of the Act which
provides that subject to prescribed exceptions, a non-citizen must not travel
to Australia without a visa that is in effect. Existing paragraph 42(2A)(d)
provides the following exception:
- the
non-citizen has been removed under section 198 to another country but has been
refused entry by that country
- the
non-citizen travels to Australia as a direct result of that refusal and
- the
non-citizen is a person who would, if in the migration zone, be an unlawful
non-citizen.
Item 2 will repeal existing paragraph 42(2A)(d) and
substitute proposed paragraph 42(2A)(d) which will clarify that the
exception is enlivened if the removal is attempted but not actually completed, for
instance, if removal is aborted before the unlawful non-citizen reaches the
destination country.
Similarly, the insertion of proposed paragraph
42(2A)(da) is designed to cover the situation where removal is completed
but the non-citizen does not actually enter the destination country.
The Explanatory Memorandum notes that the need to return a
non-citizen to Australia who has been removed, or is in the process of being
removed, could arise for a number of reasons:
For example – the non-citizen could be refused entry to a
transit country, an aircraft could be forced mid-flight to return to Australia,
the Government could decide to cancel the removal in response to an Interim
Measures Request from the United Nations, or despite being successfully removed
from Australia the non-citizen could be refused entry into the destination
country.[9]
Items 3–8 make amendments to existing sections 48
and 48A of the Act which restrict the types of visas certain unlawful
non-citizens can apply for (commonly known as the section 48 bar) which is enlivened
upon refusal or cancellation of a visa since the non-citizen last entered
Australia. The Explanatory Memorandum notes that ‘when a non-citizen has been
removed, or the subject of an attempted removal, and returned because the
removal was cancelled or they did not enter the destination country, it is
intended that they should be in the same situation as if they were never
removed, including that any relevant visa application bars should continue to
apply’.[10]
This means that if a non-citizen returns to Australia at any point after they
are removed from Australia under section 198 until they enter the destination
country, any applicable bar on making valid applications imposed by sections 48
and 48A would continue to apply to that non-citizen.
Schedule 2 – Amendments relating to
the cancellation of visas on character grounds
The amendments contained in schedule 2 are said to improve
coherency and consistency in the character related provisions of the Migration
Act, following the amendments made by the Migration Amendment
(Character and General Visa Cancellation) Act 2014.[11]
Further information about the amendments made by this Act is available in the Parliamentary
Library’s Bills
Digest.[12]
Expanded definition of ‘character
concern’
Items 1—3 expand the definition of ‘character concern’
in existing subsection 5C(1) to reflect the expanded wording of the character
test at existing subsection 501(6) of the Migration Act. The definition
of character concern is relevant to the disclosure of identifying information
in existing section 336E of the Migration Act which provides that a
person commits an offence if their conduct causes the disclosure of identifying
information and the disclosure is not a ‘permitted disclosure’. The term ‘permitted
disclosure’ is defined in existing subsection 336E(2) of the Migration Act
and paragraph 336E(2)(ec) relevantly provides that a permitted disclosure is a
disclosure that is for the purpose of identifying non-citizens who have a
criminal history or who are of ‘character concern’.
As acknowledged in the Explanatory Memorandum, these amendments
‘have the potential to increase the overall number of non-citizens who meet the
definition of character concern and who may therefore have a personal
identifier disclosed’.[13]
Visa cancellation under section
501BA
Items 5 — 8 insert a reference to existing section
501BA (cancellation of visa—setting aside and substitution of non-adverse
decision under section 501CA) into various provisions in the Migration Act (discussed
in further detail immediately below). Section 501BA applies where a decision has
been made by the Minister’s delegate or the AAT to revoke a decision to cancel
a person’s visa under subsection 501(3A). Subsection 501(3A) provides that the
Minister must cancel a visa if the person is serving a full-time prison
sentence and the Minister is satisfied that the person fails the character test
because they have a substantial criminal record or have been convicted of a
sexually based offence involving a child. Under section 501BA, the Minister is
able to set aside the decision of the delegate or the AAT if he or she is
satisfied that the cancellation of the visa is in the national interest.
Item 5 inserts a reference to section 501BA into existing
paragraph 118(f) of the Migration Act (cancellation powers do not
limit or affect each other). The effect of this amendment is to provide in
section 118 that the cancellation power under section 501BA does not limit and is
not affected by other cancellation powers in the Migration Act.
Item 6 inserts a reference to section 501BA in existing
paragraph 191(2)(d) of the Migration Act (end of certain detention). The
effect of this amendment is that a person detained because of subsection 190(2)
of the Migration Act (where an officer suspects on reasonable grounds
that a person in Australia is an unlawful non-citizen if they fail to provide a
personal identifier in certain circumstances) must be released from immigration
detention if the officer becomes aware that the non-citizen’s visa is not one that
may be cancelled under section 501BA. This amendment will ensure that section
501BA is treated in the same way as sections 501 and 501A, which are already
referred to in current paragraph 191(2)(d).
Item 7 inserts a reference to section 501BA in existing
subsections 192(1) and 192(4) of the Migration Act (detention of visa
holders whose visas liable to cancellation). The effect of this amendment is
that if an officer knows or reasonably suspects that a non-citizen holds a visa
that may be cancelled under section 501BA, the officer may detain the
non-citizen citizen (subject to subsection 192(2)). In addition, a non-citizen must
be released from immigration detention if the officer becomes aware that the person’s
visa is not one that may be cancelled under section 501BA. This amendment will ensure
that section 501BA is treated in the same way as sections 501 and 501A, which
are already referred to in current subsections 192(1) and 192(4).
Item 8 inserts a reference to section 501BA into existing
subparagraph 193(1)(a)(iv) of the Migration Act (application of law to
certain non-citizens while they remain in immigration detention). The effect of
this amendment is that a non-citizen who has had a visa cancelled by the
Minister personally under section 501BA will be unable to apply for a further
visa while they remain in the migration zone, except for a protection visa, or
a visa specified in the regulations (currently only a Bridging R (Class WR)
visa is specified for the purposes of this section).[14]
Item 9 inserts a reference to sections 501A, 501B,
501BA or 501F in existing subsection 196(4) of the Migration Act (duration
of detention). The effect of this amendment is that a person whose visa has
been cancelled on character grounds (whether by a delegate, or by the Minister
personally under section 501A, 501B or 501BA) is to be kept in immigration
detention unless a court finally determines that the detention is unlawful or
that the person is not an unlawful non-citizen.
Item 18 inserts a reference to section 501BA in
existing paragraph 501E(1)(a) of the Migration Act (refusal or
cancellation of visa—prohibition on applying for other visas). The effect of
this amendment is that a person whose visa has been cancelled by the Minister
personally under section 501BA is prevented from making a further visa
application while they are in the migration zone, other than for a protection
visa or a visa specified in the regulations (currently only a Bridging R (Class
WR) visa is specified for the purposes of this provision).
Item 19 inserts a reference to section 501BA in existing
subsection 501F(1) of the Migration Act (refusal or cancellation of
visa—refusal of other visa applications and cancellation of other visas). The
effect of this amendment is that if a person’s visa has been cancelled by the
Minister personally under section 501BA of the Migration Act, any
application that they have made for a visa (other than for a protection visa or
a visa specified in the regulations for the purposes of subsection 501F(2)) is
taken to have been refused. Further, any other visa that the person holds is
taken to be cancelled, provided it is neither a protection visa nor a visa
specified in the regulations for the purposes of subsection 501F(3).[15]
According to the Explanatory Memorandum:
This amendment gives effect to the policy intention that
people who have had their visas cancelled by the Minister personally under
section 501BA should be in the same position as other people who have had their
visa applications refused or cancelled on character grounds, in relation to
their ability to continue to hold a visa and be granted a further visa for
which they have applied.[16]
Item 20 inserts a reference to section 501BA in existing
paragraph 503(1)(b) (exclusion of certain persons from Australia). The effect
of this amendment is that a person whose visa has been cancelled by the
Minister personally under section 501BA is not entitled to enter Australia or
be in Australia at any time during the period determined under the regulations.[17]
Subitem 22(6) provides that the amendment made by item
20 applies in relation to a decision under section 501BA of the Migration
Act made before or after the commencement (that is, the day after
the Act receives Royal Assent). The Explanatory Memorandum justifies the retrospective
application of this amendment in the following terms:
The retrospective application of this item is necessary to
ensure that a person whose visa is cancelled personally by the Minister under
section 501BA of the Migration Act before commencement is excluded from
Australia in the same way as a person whose visa is cancelled personally by the
Minister under that provision after commencement.[18]
Item 21 inserts references to sections 501BA
and 501CA in subsections 503A(1), 503A(2) (protection of information supplied
by law enforcement agencies or intelligence agencies) and 503B(1) (protection
of confidential information disclosed to Federal Court or Federal Circuit
Court—permanent non-disclosure orders) in the Migration Act. The effect
of the amendment to existing subsections 503A(1) and 503A(2) is that confidential
information communicated to an authorised migration officer by a gazetted
agency that is relevant to the exercise of a power under section 501CA or 501BA
receives the same level of protection as the confidential information that is
relevant to the exercise of a power under section 501, 501A, 501B or 501C.[19]
The effect of the amendment to existing subsection 503B(1)
is that confidential information that is relevant to the exercise of a power
under section 501CA or 501BA in the context of proceedings before the Federal
Court or the Federal Circuit Court potentially receives the same level of
protection from disclosure to the applicant in the proceedings, their legal representative
or any other member of the public, as confidential information that is relevant
to the exercise of a power under section 501, 501A, 501B or 501C.[20]
Subitem 22(7) provides that the amendment made by
item 21 applies in relation to information communicated before or after
commencement (that is, the day after the Act receives Royal Assent). The
Explanatory Memorandum justifies the retrospective application of this
amendment in the following terms:
The retrospective application of this provision is necessary
to ensure the protection of confidential information relevant to the exercise
of a power under section 501CA or 501BA of the Migration Act that was given to
the department before commencement.[21]
Removal from Australia of unlawful
non-citizens
Item 10 inserts a reference to section 501CA in existing
paragraph 198(2A)(c) of the Migration Act (removal from Australia of
unlawful non-citizens). The effect of this amendment is to ensure a clear
removal power for people whose visas are cancelled by the Minister personally
under subsection 501(3A) and who are invited by the Minister personally to make
representations about that visa cancellation decision under section 501CA.
Subitem 22(2) provides that this amendment applies in
relation to an invitation given before or after commencement,
that is, the day after the Act receives Royal Assent. The Explanatory
Memorandum justifies the retrospective application of this amendment in the
following terms:
The retrospective application of this item is necessary to
put beyond doubt that there is a clear removal pathway for people who have been
invited by the Minister personally under subsection 501CA(4) to seek revocation
of their subsection 501(3A) cancellation decision before commencement, who made
representations and the Minister decided not to revoke the cancellation
decision or the person had not made representation in accordance with the
invitation and the period for making the representations has ended.[22]
Item 11 inserts proposed subsection 198(2B) into
the Migration Act (removal from Australia of unlawful non-citizens). The
effect of this amendment is to provide a clear basis for removal from Australia
of a non-citizen whose visa has been cancelled by a delegate of the Minister
(as opposed to the Minister personally) under subsection 501(3A), and where the
cancellation decision has not been revoked under section 501CA and the
non-citizen has not applied for a substantive visa that could be granted while
the non-citizen is in the migration zone.
The note at the end of the amendment provides the type of
visas for which the non-citizen may apply. Namely, a protection visa, or a visa
specified in the regulations for the purposes of subsection 501E(2) (currently only
a Bridging R (Class WR) visa is specified for the purposes of this subsection).[23]
Subitem 22(3) provides that this amendment applies in
relation to a decision under subsection 501(3A) made before or after the
commencement and to an invitation under section 501CA given before or after
commencement (that is, the day after the Act receives Royal Assent). The
Explanatory Memorandum justifies the retrospective application of this
amendment in the following terms:
The retrospective application of this item is necessary to
put beyond doubt that there is a clear power to remove people who have been
invited by a delegate of the Minister under subsection 501CA(4) of the
Migration Act to seek revocation of their subsection 501(3A) cancellation
decisions before commencement, who made representations and whose visa cancellation
decisions were not revoked or the person had not made representations in
accordance with the invitation and the period for making the representations
has ended.[24]
Schedule 3 – Other amendments of
the Migration Act
Bar on further protection visa applications
Existing section 48A of the Act prevents a non-citizen who
has been refused a protection visa, or held a protection visa that was
cancelled, from applying for a subsequent protection visa while in the
migration zone unless the Minister personally permits them to do so on public
interest grounds (under section 48B of the Migration Act).
Existing subsection 48A(1C) clarifies that the application
bars in subsections 48A(1) and (1B) apply regardless of the ground on which the
new protection visa application would be made or the criteria which the
non-citizen would claim to satisfy, and regardless of the ground on which the
earlier refused application was made or the grounds on which the cancelled
protection visa was granted.[25]
Item 1 amends existing subsection 48A(1C) to clarify
that this statutory bar applies to persons who are barred under subsection
48(1AA). That is, to a non-citizen who has been refused a protection visa where
the application was made on their behalf.[26]
According to the Explanatory Memorandum, the policy intention
was always that subsection 48A(1C) would apply, in addition to persons covered
by subsections 48A(1) and (1B), to persons also covered by subsection 48A(1AA)
and that its omission was simply an oversight.[27]
This amendment will commence on 25 September 2014, being the
date that subsection 48A(1AA) was inserted into the Migration Act by the
Migration Legislation Amendment Act (No. 1) 2014. The application
provision in item 2 clarifies that a non-citizen will be prevented from
making an application for a protection visa whether the refusal (referred to in
subsection 48(1AA)) happened before or after commencement (that is, 25 September 2014).
The Explanatory Memorandum provides the following explanation for the
retrospective application of this amendment:
This item has been given retrospective effect to avoid any
suggestion that in the period between 25 September 2014 (when subsection
48(1AA) was inserted) and the commencement of this item, a person who was
previously refused a protection visa that was made on their behalf and covered
by subsection 48A(1AA) was not barred from making a valid protection visa
application relying on a different ground or satisfaction of a different
criterion, because subsection 48A(1C) did not apply to them.[28]
The Refugee Advice and Casework Service (RACS) expressed
concern at the retrospective application of these amendments, noting that the
Bill will ‘render invalid any previous or ongoing protection visa applications
which are currently not invalid but which fall within the gap that Schedule 3
proposes to patch’.[29]
They further observed:
RACS supports the principle that migration laws should be
prospective and transparent, and we consider that it is a fundamental principal
of the rule of law that the government in all its actions is bound by rules
that are fixed and certain. This position would be offended by the passage of
legislation to extinguish existing rights arising from a visa application that
has been lodged in reliance on the current position of the law.[30]
Review of Fast-Track decisions
The amendments made by items 3 and 10 are designed to
ensure that the AAT can review certain decisions to refuse to grant a
protection visa to a ‘fast-track applicant’ where the refusal is based on
character or security grounds, as was the intention of the Migration and Maritime
Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Act 2014
(Legacy Caseload Act).[31]
Item 3 amends the note to the definition of ‘fast
track decision’ contained in subsection 5(1) of the Migration Act to
clarify that a ‘fast track decision’ that is a ‘fast track reviewable decision’
is reviewable by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) and that ‘some
decisions’ made in the circumstances mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b) of the
definition are reviewable by the AAT (such as a decision relying on subsection
36(1C) of the Migration Act).
Item 10 inserts proposed subsection 500(3A)
into the Migration Act. This amendment will ensure that existing
subsection 500(3) does not prevent a fast track applicant refused a protection
visa from making an application to the AAT to review a decision referred to in
paragraph 500(1)(b) or (c).[32]
Item 11 clarifies that the amendment made by item 10 will only apply to
decisions made after the commencement (that is, the day after the Act
receives Royal Assent). It is not clear why the commencement date of this item
is not 18 April 2015, being the date Schedule 4 (amendments relating to fast
track assessment process) of the Legacy Caseload Act commenced (as is being
done for amendments contained in Part 1 of Schedule 3).[33]
Cessation of visas
The amendments made by items 5 to 8 are designed to
ensure that visa ceasing provisions in sections 82, 173 and 174 of the Migration
Act operate as intended under policy.
Most significantly, item 6 inserts proposed
section 82A into the Migration Act. It provides that if:
- a
non-citizen holds a visa at a particular time
- the
visa is not in effect at that time and
- if
the visa were in effect at that time, the visa would cease to be in effect
under section 82 (other than subsection 82(8)), 173 or 174
then the visa is taken to have ceased to be in effect under
that section at that time.
The effect of this amendment is to clarify that all but one
of the listed ceasing events (section 82(8)) will cause a dormant visa to be
taken to have ceased to be in effect, despite the visa not being in effect when
the ceasing event happens. As a result (except in the case of the subsection
82(8) ceasing event) of the cessation, the visa period of the dormant visa will
end, and the visa will never come into effect.[34]
This amendment is explained in greater detail in the
Explanatory Memorandum.[35]
Schedule 4 – Amendments relating to
exercise of maritime powers
Item 2 amends existing section 40 of the Maritime
Powers Act which curtails the exercise of powers at a place in another
country in certain prescribed circumstances.[36]
Section 8 of the Maritime Powers Act relevantly defines a ‘country’ to
include the territorial sea and archipelagic waters of the country. Proposed
subsection 40(2) provides that subsection 40(1) will not apply to an
exercise of powers in the following circumstances:
- the
exercise of powers is part of a continuous exercise of powers that commenced in
accordance with any applicable requirements of Part 2 (disregarding new
subsection (2)) and
- occurs
in the course of passage of a vessel or aircraft through or above waters that
are part of a country; and a relevant maritime officer, or the Minister,
considers that the passage is in accordance with the 1982 United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The rationale for this amendment is explained in the
Explanatory Memorandum in the following terms:
The intention behind section 40 is to ensure that powers are
exercised under the Maritime Powers Act in a manner consistent with the
principle of territorial sovereignty at international law. Thus the use of
enforcement powers within another country normally would require some form of
agreement by that country. However, the section did not explicitly allow for
the exercise of powers in the course of passage through and over waters within
another country already permitted under international law, as reflected in
the Convention. Examples of such passage include a vessel in the course of
innocent passage, transit passage or archipelagic sea lanes passage. In those
circumstances, under international law, no further agreement or approval by the
coastal state is required...The purpose of the amendment is to confirm the
operation of the Maritime Powers Act in circumstances where vessels and
aircraft are considered to be exercising passage rights consistent with the
Convention. [Emphasis added][37]
The Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International
Refugee Law (Kaldor Centre) is of the view that these amendments ‘are intended
to justify activities taking place in the territorial waters of other
countries, such as Indonesia, pursuant to Operation Sovereign Borders’.[38]
To this end, they note that ‘turning back boats and patrolling for this purpose
within the territorial waters of another State do not constitute innocent
passage under the Convention...’.[39]
Proposed subsection 40(3) preserves the lawfulness
of the activity under domestic law in circumstances where there is a defective
consideration of the Convention. The Kaldor Centre relevantly notes that
‘the fact that a relevant maritime officer or the Minister mistakenly considers
that the exercise of powers is consistent with the Convention cannot render the
exercise of powers lawful as a matter of international law’.[40]
Members, Senators and Parliamentary staff can obtain
further information from the Parliamentary Library on (02) 6277 2500.
[1]. Migration Act 1958,
accessed 30 September 2015.
[2]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, p.
1, accessed 21 September 2015.
[3]. Maritime Powers Act 2013,
accessed 30 September 2015.
[4]. United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, done in Montego Bay on
10 December 1982, [1994] ATS 31 (entered into force for Australia and generally
16 November 1994), accessed 30 September 2015.
[5]. Senate
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, Inquiry
into Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015 [Provisions],
The Senate, Canberra, 2015, accessed 6 October 2015.
[6]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 4.
[7]. The
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights can be found at page 40 of the
Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill.
[8]. P
Dutton, ‘Second
reading speech: Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015’,
House of Representatives, Debates, (proof), 16 September 2015, p. 19,
accessed 21 September 2015.
[9]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 9.
[10]. Ibid.,
p. 10.
[11]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 1; Migration
Amendment (Character and General Visa Cancellation) Act 2014, accessed
30 September 2015.
[12]. M
Coombs, Migration
Amendment (Character and General Visa Cancellation) Bill 2014, Bills digest,
53, 2014–15, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 25 November 2014, accessed 30
September 2015.
[13]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 15.
[14]. Ibid.,
pp. 16–17.
[15]. Migration Regulations 1994
do not appear to have specified any visas for the purposes of existing subsections
501F(2) or (3), accessed 30 September 2015.
[16]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 21.
[17]. Migration
Regulations 1994 do not appear to have specified any periods for the purposes
of existing subsection 503(1).
[18]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 23.
[19]. Ibid.,
p. 21.
[20]. Ibid.,
p. 22.
[21]. Ibid.,
p. 23.
[22]. Ibid.,
p. 22.
[23]. Regulation
2.12AA, Migration
Regulations 1994, accessed 30 September 2015.
[24]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 22.
[25]. Subsection
48A(1C) was inserted by the Migration Amendment Act 2014 effective from
28 May 2014. For background information on this provision see: M Coombs, Migration
Amendment Bill 2013, Bills digest, 43, 2013–14, Parliamentary Library,
Canberra, 12 February 2014, accessed 22 September 2015.
[26]. Subsection
48A(1AA) was inserted into the Migration Act by the Migration
Legislation Amendment Act (No. 1) 2014 and commenced on 25 September
2014. For background information on this provision see: E Karlsen, Migration
Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014, Bills digest, 81, 2013–14,
Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 4 June 2014, accessed 22 September 2015.
[27]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 25.
[28]. Ibid.,
p. 5.
[29]. Refugee
Advice and Casework Service (RACS), Submission
to Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, Inquiry
into Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, 8 October
2015, accessed 13 October 2015.
[30]. Ibid.
[31]. Ibid.,
p. 28; Migration and
Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload)
Act 2014, accessed 30 September 2015.
[32]. Existing
subsection 500(3) provides that a person cannot make an application for review
unless they could seek merits review under Part 5 or 7 of the Migration Act
(if the decision had been made on grounds other than those referred to in
paragraph 500(1)(b) or (c)).
[33]. Migration and Maritime
Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload),
commencement proclamation, 16 April 2015, accessed 29 September 2015.
[34]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, op.
cit., p. 31.
[35]. Ibid.,
pp. 29–33.
[36]. Maritime Powers Act 2013,
accessed 30 September 2015.
[37]. Ibid.,
p. 37.
[38]. Andrew
and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, Submission
to Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, Inquiry
into Migration and Maritime Powers Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2015, 6 October
2015, accessed 13 October 2015.
[39]. Ibid.
[40]. Ibid.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.
© Commonwealth of Australia
Creative Commons
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, and to the extent that copyright subsists in a third party, this publication, its logo and front page design are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia licence.
In essence, you are free to copy and communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
Disclaimer: Bills Digests are prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament. They are produced under time and resource constraints and aim to be available in time for debate in the Chambers. The views expressed in Bills Digests do not reflect an official position of the Australian Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion. Bills Digests reflect the relevant legislation as introduced and do not canvass subsequent amendments or developments. Other sources should be consulted to determine the official status of the Bill.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or the Library‘s Central Entry Point for referral.