Ryan Adam* came to Australia with his family (wife and children) on a skilled visa seven years ago.
During a domestic argument with his wife, he "punched her in the face and chest" which caused bruising and swelling. When she tried to call the police, he took the phone away.
Adam was arrested the next day by police and was later convicted under the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 of NSW for ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’.
He was sentenced to a good behaviour bond for a period of 18 months.
A few years later he applied for Australian citizenship by conferral which was refused as the applicant was not considered of having a ‘good character’ as required by the Australian Citizenship ACT 2007.
The Act states that “A person is eligible to become an Australian citizen if the Minister is satisfied that…the person is of good character at the time of the Minister’s decision on the application.”
The applicant took the case to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) where the decision by the representative of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs was affirmed.
The Tribunal was told that it has been six years after the ‘horrific act’ as described by the applicant.
Adam provided a number of character references from office colleagues and friends about his character to the Tribunal. It was also noted that there had been no similar acts of abuse and the husband and wife had another child after the incident.
The Tribunal’s judge noted that domestic violence is an “insidious force that stalks many families”.
“It is not uncommon for victims of domestic violence to downplay the level of violence within a relationship in order to preserve the relationship and mitigate the collateral damage that inevitably flows from a conviction for domestic violence, including, within the context of non-citizens, the real prospect of removal from Australia.”
The applicant told the Tribunal that he had “reflected deeply on his behaviour” and adopted strategies aimed to assist him in reducing stress levels, including a focus on diet, and taking out family time.
He also said that similar behaviour has not been repeated after the incident.
However, the Tribunal’s judge also noted that six years had elapsed since the incident, but stated that he was "not satisfied that the applicant has gained a sufficient level of insight into his own behaviour and beliefs which led to him inflicting violence on his wife."
“Threats or acts of violence committed within a domestic context are wholly incompatible with a claim to be of good character. Significant remorse and remedial action must be involved in rehabilitating one’s character.”
The Tribunal stated that although it is a ‘solitary incident, and despite his many positive attributes’, the applicant does not satisfy the requirement of good character as required in the Citizenship Act.
The Tribunal also mentioned that the applicant may apply for citizenship in future and "strongly recommended" that he take steps "to develop greater awareness and insight into this insidious problem, and to develop practical resources in order to better to protect his family from any recurrence."
Note: *Fictional name has been used to maintain privacy.
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault, domestic or family violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit . In an emergency, call 000.
