An Australian tribunal has ruled in favour of a Fijian national seeking a protection visa, finding that his past criminal conviction does not outweigh Australia’s international obligations to protect him from harm if returned to Fiji.
In a decision delivered on 27 November 2025, the Administrative Review Tribunal of Australia overturned a refusal by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to deny a Protection (Class XA) (Subclass 866) visa to a 32-year-old Fijian citizen, identified in the ruling as MPGJ.
The tribunal found that while the applicant had been convicted in New South Wales of sexual intercourse without consent, he posed only a minimal or remote risk of reoffending.
He was sentenced to a non-custodial three-year Community Corrections Order, with the sentencing judge determining that the offence fell well below the mid-range for such matters.
The Tribunal ruled that the applicant satisfied the character test under section 501 of the Migration Act 1958, noting the absence of any prior criminal history in Australia or Fiji.
A criminal records check by the Fiji Police Force confirmed he had no convictions in Fiji.
Central to the ruling was the tribunal’s consideration of Australia’s protection obligations. the Tribunal was informed that the applicant faced a real risk of harm if returned to Fiji, triggering Australia’s non-refoulement obligations under international law.
The tribunal accepted evidence showing strong prospects of rehabilitation, including psychological assessments, completion of counselling and rehabilitation programs, stable employment, secure accommodation, and family and community support. It also found that the offending occurred during a period of emotional vulnerability and was out of character.
“The risk of future criminal conduct is minimal or remote,” the tribunal ruled, concluding that the discretion to refuse the protection visa on character grounds was not enlivened.
The decision sets aside the earlier refusal and substitutes it with a finding that the applicant should not be refused the visa, effectively clearing the way for the protection visa to be granted.
