Family violence is a crime in Australia. You don’t have to remain in a violent relationship to stay in Australia. Family violence provisions exists in Australian immigration laws to protect partner visa applicants. But what if such provisions fails to do so. A FV victim suffered for believing that the family violence provision in AU will help him but he got dragged into a more devastated and vulnerable situation for taking action against his Australian abusive partner.

Mr Kumar lodged a partner visa subclass 820/801 application in June 2013 and it got refused due to a Schedule 3 criteria which asks the applicant to provide reasons why he applied for the partner visa application onshore. He had the right to review the decision and given that he was certain that he would be able to provide sufficient evidence to the Migration review tribunal, he applied for a review in MRT. When he lodged the review application, his partner assured that she will provide the evidence to meet the Schedule 3 criteria when asked by the MRT, as the evidence was related to the sponsoring partner. While waiting for the hearing, his sponsoring partner started being abusive to him. When things got worse Mr Kumar called DV connect for help and as suggested, he filed an application for a protection order in Magistrates Court in October 2014. While fighting against Family violence in the court, Mr Kumar was asked to provide evidence related to the Schedule 3 criteria and invited to come for hearing on January 2015. When Mr Kumar appeared at MRT for the hearing he explained to the MRT officer that his relationship had broken down due to Family violence. Since this family violence was being committed by his sponsoring partner, he therefore was unable to provide evidence proving that when he initially applied for partner visa, his Australian partner didn’t want him to leave Australia because as she was physically unwell and had no one else to take care of her. Furthermore, Mr Kumar’s wife was not willing to go to his home country as she became severely ill on a previous visit.

Considering these circumstances, Mr Kumar naturally had to take care of his wife. However, on Mr Kumar’s hearing day, even though he had been previously assured by his sponsoring partner that she would explain this situation to the MRT officer, Mr Kumar explained to officer that she denied to support him. The reason for this being that Mr Kumar had taken action against her for committing family violence. Since she was the only person who could provide this evidence, and given that Mr Kumar wasn’t able to obtain this evidence from his sponsoring partner due to family violence, and because of this his MRT application was refused.

Mr Kumar’s MRT application was refused, even though he provided a Temporary Protection Order from the Magistrates Court along with his original protection order application as proof of the family violence he suffered. He requested for the Tribunal officer to wait until he could get a final protection order from court and asked for the Schedule 3 criteria which he could not satisfy because of Family violence to be waived. However, the officer did not consider the Family violence provision clearly stated in the Immigration laws and Mr Kumar was refused his visa on the same day.

After getting abused emotionally, physically and financially by his Australian partner and having very limited money to survive, Mr Kumar wasn’t able to go to federal court. He decided to seek help through Ministerial Intervention as the Minister has the power to intervene where unique and exceptional circumstances exists and where the legislation does not anticipate and leads to an unfair result. Mr Kumar explained everything in his appeal about how he got trapped by Family violence provisions in Immigration laws and certain MRT laws. Family violence provisions say that the applicant of partner visa doesn’t have to stay in a violent relationship to be able to stay in Australia. On the other hand, the MRT officer refused Mr Kumar’s visa for not providing the evidence for which he was dependent on his abusive partner. Mr Kumar got stuck between two migration laws after taking action against Family violence. He even provided a Final protection order from the magistrate’s court to the Minister himself. But the Minister also refused to intervene in his unique situation.

Even after the MRT officer refused Mr Kumar’s onshore visa application, he was still eligible to apply for his partner visa offshore, whether he was able to meet Schedule 3 criteria or not. After having taken action against family violence, Mr. Kumar also lost the opportunity to apply for his partner visa offshore as that means he would have had to stay in a relationship with his abusive partner.

So how do Family violence provisions justify Mr Kumar’s situation, without forcing him to stay in a violent relationship to be able to stay in Australia. These provisions didn’t protect Mr Kumar in his unique situation. He also lost his other opportunities to be able to stay Australia for going against Family violence, even after providing a final protection order from the court.

For the grant of a partner visa under the Family violence legislation, immigration requires the applicant to be awaiting a decision for a partner visa and provide a court order as proof of Family violence. Mr Kumar met both of these conditions. Yet, his partner visa got refused even considering his unique and exceptional circumstances where following the family violence law led him to an unfair decision made by Australian immigration.

So how it works:-

1. If the applicant of a partner visa commits family violence against the sponsor, the applicant’s visa will be refused and he will be deported.

2. If the sponsoring partner commits family violence against the applicant and they cannot provide proof of violence, the applicant’s visa will be refused and he will be deported.

3. If the sponsoring partner commits family violence and the applicant provides a court order as a proof of violence, the applicant’s partner visa will be granted.

Mr Kumar’s provided a court order as proof of violence against him however, his partner visa was still refused and he is now facing deportation.

Being an Australian citizen, I do not think it’s fair that Mr Kumar’s abusive partner was able to move on with her life with full freedom, rights and government benefits, while Mr Kumar is still suffering the consequences of doing the right thing and taking a stand against family violence. Not only has he suffered abuse from his partner, he has also been left isolated and devastated by the Australian government. Mr Kumar not only feels that it was a mistake to take action against family violence, since it has unfortunately ruined his future in Australia, but has also been led to believe that the family violence provisions in this country do not support both males and non-residents.

Only those who have been in a similar situation relating to family violence can imagine how much mental stress, anxiety and depression Mr Kumar has been through. However, on top of suffering an abusive relationship, he also had to deal with a multitude of problems relating to his visa that only arose after he had taken a proactive stand against family violence.

If Family violence provisions are meant to protect applicants and if Family Violence is a crime in Australia, then deporting Mr Kumar does not justify Australia’s fight against Family violence. In the end, it is a win win situation for the Perpetrator who succeeds as intended by putting the victim in the situation of deportation one way or the other.

This is not Australia. Australia is known to be just and fair to everyone regardless of caste, region, colour, creed or gender.

As an Australian citizen, I request The Hon David Coleman MP as the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to reconsider Mr Kumar’s situation and bring him the justice he deserves, and grant him his visa. If Australia believes that family violence is a crime then Mr Kumar does not deserve to be deported for taking action against family violence. I request all Australians and readers, please share and sign this petition to show your support.