Immigration Minister Andrew Giles has revealed he is considering whether to cancel the visa of a Melbourne gangland figure, who the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) allowed to stay in the country just yesterday.
The AAT reinstated 51-year-old Kevin Farrugia’s visa on Monday, despite the Maltese-born man’s extensive criminal history.
The tribunal cited the Immigration Minister’s contentious “direction 99”, which insists immigration officials and tribunals take into account the length and strength of a foreign national’s ties to Australia when considering their visas.
Home Affairs officials are scrambling to replace the direction with a new edict that puts greater emphasis on community protection, but “direction 99” remains in force in the interim and is still being taken into account by the AAT.
Farrugia has more than 40 convictions to his name, including for kidnapping, drug trafficking, assault and possessing a firearm.
He has spent more than 12 years behind bars and is an associate of the notorious Mokbel family in Melbourne.
Shadow Immigration Minister Dan Tehan used Question Time to ask whether Mr Giles would be cancelling Farrugia’s visa once more.
“I am aware of the case that the shadow minister refers to, which was decided by the AAT yesterday, and it is under consideration in accordance with the national interest,” the immigration minister responded.
Mr Giles added that he had cancelled 35 visas in recent days, following revelations that “direction 99” had resulted in a number of convicted criminals being allowed to stay in the country under rulings by the AAT.
In answering the question from Mr Tehan, the immigration minister again took aim at Liberal leader Peter Dutton’s record in the Home Affairs portfolio.
The government argued he allowed almost 1,300 convicted criminals to stay in the country.
“One of them … an individual with convictions for a sexual-based offence in relation to a girl under 14, and for repeatedly breaching bail conditions.
“The Opposition failed — he failed!”
‘Strength of ties’ to Australia a key factor in visa reinstated
Kevin Farrugia arrived in Australia from Malta in 1972, aged 17 months.
The AAT noted his parents and at least two of his three siblings had become Australian citizens, and his 15-year-old daughter and partner were also citizens.
AAT senior member Professor Ann O’Connell said his offending over the years has been “serious” and that there was a “moderate risk” of him reoffending.
“The applicant has lived virtually his whole life in Australia. His partner and daughter and all of his immediate family are in Australia and are all Australian citizens,” she said.
“It would be extremely hard on his partner and daughter to relocate and it is unlikely they would accompany him to Malta because of the established nature of their lives in Australia.
“A non-revocation decision would therefore result in difficult choices and significant adverse effects for his family irrespective of what decisions are made.”
Professor O’Connell directly cited “direction 99” in overturning the decision to revoke Farrugia’s decision on character grounds.
“Having weighed all the relevant considerations individually and cumulatively, the Tribunal is satisfied there is another reason to revoke the cancellation decision,” she said.
“That is because the primary considerations ‘Strength, nature and duration of ties’, ‘Best interests of minor children’, and the other consideration ‘Extent of impediments if removed’, outweigh the countervailing primary considerations.”
“Direction 99” was penned in January 2023 after years of campaigning by successive New Zealand governments.
Their complaints had been that Kiwi criminals who spent the majority of their lives in Australia were being deported, despite having few ties across the Tasman.
New Zealand’s Foreign Minister Winston Peters spoke to Andrew Giles about the issue on Tuesday.
“New Zealand accepts that Australia has the right to determine what level of offending by non-citizens is unacceptable,” he posted on social media.
“But we do not want to see deportation of people with little or no connection to New Zealand, whose formative experiences were nearly all in Australia.
“New Zealand will keep discussing this matter with Australia.”