Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Pursuant to order and at the request of the chairs of the respective committees, I present the final report of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee on the prospective-marriage visa program together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

The marriage visa inquiry was referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee on 25 November 2011 to examine the particular aspects of the prospective-marriage visa program. The committee received nine submissions and held one public hearing in Canberra, on 25 May 2012. Overall, the committee considered that at there was a high level of integrity within the program and that there was no need for wide-scale reform, which was reassuring. However, evidence presented to the committee suggested that some aspects of the prospective-marriage visa program could be improved, especially to better protect young applicants and their intended spouses at risk of forced marriages or people trafficking. Unfortunately, there is a shortage of empirical data in this area, but the committee considered forced marriages to be an abuse of human rights for which safeguards could be established within the visa program. Certainly there has been some anecdotal evidence circulated within the Australian community which raised concerns about this potential abuse of human rights.

To minimise the risks, the committee recommended a formal policy of separately interviewing all applicants and sponsors under the age of 18 years as well as increasing the minimum age criterion for visa holders to 18 years. These two recommendations, if adopted, will allow DIAC to more accurately explore issues of intention and consent by having a formal interview process; they will also allow applicants and sponsors more time to consider their options and to seek help.

In its submission, the Australian Law Reform Commission highlighted that prospective-marriage visa holders cannot currently access the family violence exception contained in the Migration Regulations 1994. The committee agreed that visa holders should not remain in abusive relationships just because they believe that they will be deported if the relationship is terminated; clearly that would be a very unfortunate consequence. Therefore, the committee has recommended that the Australian government extend the family violence exception to prospective-marriage visa holders, as was also recommended by the Australian Law Reform Commission. DIAC was not able to report statistically on the incidence of fraud within the prospective-marriage visa program. The committee believed that in future DIAC's electronic database should contain the facility to do this and recommended accordingly. While no evidence was available concerning the number of fraud prosecutions, the committee noted a number of statutory offences in the Migration Act 1958 specifically relevant to the prospective-marriage visa program. The committee has therefore recommended the development of a specific prosecution policy for these offences.

DIAC advised that arranged marriages are an unquantifiable part of the prospective-marriage visa program. The committee noted, however, the importance of distinguishing between arranged and forced marriages. We understand that arranged marriages are culturally appropriate, worthy of great respect and often extremely successful. They are fundamentally different from forced marriages, which are abhorrent to all of us. The committee emphasised the need to ascertain the full and free consent of prospective-marriage visa applicants and their intended spouses to identify those marriages which are in fact forced marriages. The committee has recommended that DIAC's decision makers expressly consider the issue of real consent and record the non-consent of a party in such a way as to protect against adverse repercussions associated with any disclosure.

A consistent theme in the inquiry was a lack of knowledge about forced marriages in Australia, including within the prospective-marriage visa program. The committee has acknowledged recent research endeavours, including by the Australian Institute of Criminology, and has recommended an Australian government working group investigate the incidence of forced marriages in Australia and explore options for assisting victims.

Finally, the committee has endorsed the suggestion from some submitters that an information package should be provided to newly arrived migrants on a prospective-marriage visa or partner visa, recommending that such migrants be advised in an appropriate language of the law in Australia in relation to family violence and forced marriage and how victims can seek assistance.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those persons and organisations who made submissions to the inquiry and enriched our understanding of this area and informed our recommendations. I would also particularly like to thank the staff of the secretariat, who did their usual sterling work in managing the inquiry, dealing with the submissions received and drafting the committee report. I commend the report to the chamber.