The man’s sister said he was unlikely to survive being deported to New Zealand. Photo / 123rf
The 28-year-old father of two has now failed in a bid to overturn a decision to cancel his visa, and will be sent to New Zealand as a 501 deportee.
He had no friends, family, or social contacts in New Zealand, and had never lived or worked here as an adult.
The man is named in the decision by the Administrative Review Tribunal of Australia, but NZME has elected not to name him or his family, because of his likely refugee status on arrival in New Zealand as a child.
Reporting on refugees was subject to strict legal and ethical guidelines designed to protect individuals.
Out of Africa, arrived in Australia via NZ
The man arrived in New Zealand with his parents from an East African nation as a 4-year-old, according to details contained in the tribunal’s recent decision.
He and his family then moved to Australia in 2010, when he was 12.
His sister said in evidence to the tribunal that he was unlikely to survive, and that he had told her he would take his life if ordered to return to New Zealand.
The decision by immigration authorities to cancel his visa was affirmed by the tribunal, primarily through his failure to pass the “good character” test.
Australia has a low tolerance of any criminal or other serious conduct by visa applicants or those holding a limited stay visa, the tribunal said.
Criminal behaviour forged as a teen
In the years after he moved to Australia, the man was convicted of more than 20 offences related to his driving, dishonesty, burglary and violence.
In December 2019, he was sentenced to more than four years in prison on a range of offending including fraud, aggravated burglary, common assault and theft.
Months later, he was released on parole but then committed three drink-drive offences.
He claimed to have been influenced by the gang he was involved with at the time, and by the ease with which he found himself mixing with the wrong people.
It was a life he claimed to have since left behind.
Travel back to Africa
The man had returned to Africa once in 2016 on a holiday with his father, to meet his prospective wife, whom he later married in Africa in 2023.
She said in evidence with the help of an interpreter that Australia “looked good at first” as she was a “happy wife living with her husband and children”.
She had arrived in Australia some time after her husband returned there in September 2023, wanting to build a new life with his family, he told the tribunal.
He did not disclose his prior offending on his two incoming passenger cards, because his father, whom he had travelled with the first time, “did not know English”, a friend had filled out the form and that he was young and did not look at the form or read what was on it.
The second time, he claimed to have filled out the form incorrectly, because he was scared that if he disclosed his offending he would be deported.
Hard for wife to survive
He said if removed from Australia and his wife remained, she would “have a hard time without him” and that it would be hard for her to survive.
He said she would likely divorce him and find another husband.
His wife said that she came to Australia to be with her husband and without him she would not be able to survive or help herself and their two children.
She told the tribunal she had no plans to follow him to New Zealand and she did not want to move back to Africa, but she would not divorce him.
The man’s sister said their family was providing for his wife and children while he was in detention, but it was not easy.
She said the pair still owed $8000 to the hospital where their second daughter was born, and they had left their car unregistered to pay this debt.
Car registration in Australia could exceed $1000 annually, depending on location.
Tribunal suggests wife explore visa options
The tribunal accepted the man’s arguments about the psychological impact of removal on his wife, children, and extended family, but his wife was “not prevented from exploring her visa options in New Zealand”.
A multi-page decision outlined in detail the five primary considerations and four other considerations the tribunal weighed in reaching its decision to affirm the decision to cancel the man’s visa.
In the end, it was satisfied that it should exercise its discretionary power to cancel the visa.
The decision immediately rendered the man an unlawful non-citizen and he was to be removed “as soon as reasonably practicable”.
NZME has approached the man’s lawyer in Western Australia for comment.
Tracy Neal is a Nelson-based Open Justice reporter at NZME. She was previously RNZ’s regional reporter in Nelson-Marlborough and has covered general news, including court and local government for the Nelson Mail.