Someone may remember more, I recall Abbott or someone saying they were going to do away with the tribunals before or just after the election.

Anyone with info?

It seems reasonable to me for a refugee to subsequently obtain false documents with a different identity in order to visit his/her family in their country of origin, perhaps also to bring some of their belongings. Obviously they couldn't remain there for too long lest they be recognised.

Wouldn't you do the same?

Dear Philip,

There is much here that I find puzzling.

It seems that - 4,389 visa decisions made by Mr
Dutton or his delegate in the past year were
overturned by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT).
Which means that of the 11,323 ministerial visa
decisions reviewed in the 12 months to April 30 this
year, the AAT rejected 39 per cent of them.

Some of those that the AAt overturned included
Mr Dutton's decision to kick Indian sex creep taxi
driver Jagdeep Singh after he admitted assaulting female
passengers in Melbourne. The AAT also foiled Mr Dutton's
attempt to deport rapist Carl Stafford to New Zealand
despite Stafford having racked up 365 convictions in
Australia.

As Mr Dutton has pointed out: "These people, if they are
criminals or not legitimate refugees are displacing people
who have a claim to be made, people who are being
slaughtered in the Middle East now that we would want to
give protection to."

It appears that the Minister has the power to set aside
AAT decisions. Why isn't he considering to do just that,
at least on a case by case basis.

It makes no sense.

It has long been established that asylum seekers are mainly con merchants who are taking us for a ride. If there is evidence that they or a refugee/immigrant has lied to us about anything, their claim should be rejected and they put am a plane out ASAP. We are fools to ourselves.

Interviews should begin with the assumption that they are lying and it is up to them to prove their case.

Sadly, there is nothing new or unusual about this nonsense. I recall some years ago writing to the then Immigration Minister (don't recall which idiot was stuffing up the job then) about a similar instance where 'refugees' supposedly fleeing from danger were regularly returning to Afghanistan on business and for family holidays!

I was informed by the Minister's flunkey that they, like any other 'Australian' were allowed to come and go as they please. I'm not sure what was not understood about the word 'refugee' by the flunkey, nor how Afghanistan suddenly became safe for someone who had been granted a protection visa because they said it wasn't safe when the came here by boat.

Dutton and his governmemt are treacherous idiots, who should be brought before the courts to explain why they are unable to perform their principle task of protecting Australia, and why they should remain in office at our expense.

In another really stupid situation concerning this rot, Iran is refusing to take back several detained and rejected illegals that the Stick Insect wants to return to them. Nothing at all to do with the Immigration Department makes any sense at all. And, once again, Australian politicians are our worst enemies.

I have look for the case on the AAT website but it only publishes a selection of refugee decisions.

Without more details it is hard to make an informed assessment of the decision but in my dealings with the AAT they generally get things right. There is a lot of experience among the members including judges of the Federal Court of Australia.
http://www.aat.gov.au/AAT/files/98/9867fda3-1b33-49f7-8f1f-781028fcba13.pdf

They are not "faceless bed wetting, heart bleeding bureaucrats" as so sneeringly asserted by the ignorant dropkick in the original link.

So it really comes down to whether those who have claimed to have been in fear of their lives should be able to return to their home countries to visit. There are certainly places even in Australia that I would be happy to visit but uncomfortable living there. I have lived in countries where our compound had glass topped 8 foot walls and we employed a full time guard who had more than one occasion to fire his weapon. Being in a house that could be targeted after planning is a hell of a lot different to visiting and remaining mobile.

That is not to say people shouldn't be held accountable for what they put on their applications for refugee status because it remains a vulnerable system open to fear-mongering by our less than ethical rightwingers.