This blog depicts a hypothetical situation on what would happen to Mr. Kailash Sirohiya’s visa or citizenship if he were in Australia. I am not commenting about who is right and wrong in the actual case unfolding in Nepal but giving my opinion as a Registered Migration Agent in Australia on a hypothetical situation.
Lets see what would have happened if Kailash Sirohiya was in Australia and applied for an Australian visa or the case officer believed he lied on his previous visa or citizenship application. There is a Public Interest Criteria (PIC) 4020 that he would have to meet. If the case officer believed that Mr. Siirohiya provided bogus documents or false and misleading information- there is a wholes set of process that would unfold.
First and foremost, there would not be an arrest. This big drama that we see in Nepal of someone being arrested- I do not believe this would ever happen in Australia. Yes there would be news articles, TV programs discussing this but an arrest- I think that is too much.
The department would have issued a Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation (NOICC) and given him some time to explain his side of story. He would have hired expensive lawyers (and/or Registered Migration Agents) who would then ask for an extension to provide a response, drafted and then sent a well written NOICC response.
If after the response , the case officer is still not satisfied- then his visa would have been cancelled but till now the news cycle would have died down. People would start caring less about this thing. Sadly , in Nepal it would still be a live thing as people like to talk about other people at their high level meetings at the local tea stall.
But the real fight for Mr. Sirohiya would start now- he would have to file an Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) review, provide proof that he did not lie on his application or citizenship. During all this he would still be in Australia on a Bridging Visa E. Unless there are substantiated proof that he has done something criminal- he would not be arrested.
After some time at AAT and if he can prove that he has not provided bogus documents or false and misleading information – AAT would remit his application back or set aside the decision. This means he would win. Even if he had provided bogus documents or false and misleading information and he could show compelling reasons affecting Australia – he would win his case. For a man of his stature – that would be an easy thing to show.
Alas, he is not an Australian visa applicant or an Australian citizen. Things would have been simple for him.
Disclaimer again : I do not and will not comment on the political scenarios/ personal situation affecting this case. The above blog is only a hypothetical situation had Mr Sirohiya been in Australia. A lot of things would affect this case had it been a real PIC 4020 case. Therefore, its best to consult a Registered Migration Agent if you have such a case.
Written By
Sanat Gupta
Registered Migration Agent
MARN : 1466755
Mobile No: 0451776199
