A federal safety program designed to assist migrant survivors of domestic and family violence (DFV) has come under fire for adding stress and complications to an already challenging situation. Legal experts argue that the Department of Home Affairs must reconsider its requirement for documentary evidence proving that a relationship was “genuine” as part of the support measures for victims of family violence.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke has taken the significant step of revoking the visas of individuals who commit DFV, a move that has been described as unprecedented. For many women on temporary visas facing domestic violence in Australia, their abusers are often their visa sponsors, complicating their ability to seek help.
Returning to their countries of origin is often not a viable option, as many fear being separated from their Australian children or facing societal stigma and further abuse due to the dissolution of their relationships.
The Department of Home Affairs has provisions in place under the Migration Act for victims of family violence. However, the application process requires proof of a “genuine” relationship, typically in the form of documents that many victims do not possess due to their circumstances.
This article contains sensitive content related to domestic and family violence.
A migrant mother, referred to as Sophia to protect her identity, has shared her experience of severe abuse from her former husband, who was also her visa sponsor. She endured physical, verbal, and sexual abuse, alongside coercive control that restricted her freedom, including her ability to learn English or access financial resources.
“He held onto our passports, controlled our finances, and dictated every aspect of our lives,” Sophia recounted. “He monitored my communications and isolated me, threatening to deport me if I reached out to my sister.”
In an effort to provide for her child, Sophia resorted to scavenging cans from garbage bins to exchange them for small amounts of money to buy food.
Following the end of her relationship, she sought assistance from Settlement Services International to apply for the Home Affairs family violence provisions. However, she faced the challenge of demonstrating that her relationship was “genuine” through documentation such as joint bills or bank accounts, which she was unable to provide due to her situation.
“It was incredibly challenging to communicate my circumstances to immigration,” she noted. Sophia submitted her application in 2023 and is still awaiting a response.
Kristie Mellor, a senior solicitor at the Immigration Advice and Rights Centre, criticized the Department’s process, stating that it prioritizes the evaluation of the relationship’s validity over the assessment of domestic violence claims. “The department examines what they call the pillars of the relationship—financial arrangements, the nature of the household, social aspects, and the couple’s commitment—before considering any evidence of family violence,” she explained.
Ms. Mellor emphasized that this approach is problematic, leading many victims to struggle at the initial stage of the process. “I suspect that some individuals feel compelled to stay in abusive relationships because they find the documentation requirements so overwhelming,” she said. “For victims of financial abuse, gathering such evidence can be next to impossible.”
She proposed that the department should first evaluate evidence of domestic violence, which would allow them to infer the genuineness of the relationship based on the context of the abuse.
Ms. Mellor expressed concern that navigating the provisions without legal help is extremely challenging, particularly for those lacking support. “We receive an average of 18 new inquiries weekly from victims of domestic violence, and last year we had to refer over 250 individuals to other services due to inadequate funding,” she remarked.
Legal Aid ACT attorney Jessica Liao highlighted that the provisions currently exclude numerous temporary visa holders. “Only specific subclasses of visas can access these protections,” she pointed out, noting that secondary applicants on their partner’s student visas often find themselves without recourse in situations of family violence.
Her colleague, Lyn Payne, added that Canberra being a hub for international students means that many women are dependent on their spouses’ student visas. “When family violence occurs in these cases, the only advice we can offer is that they must return home,” she stated.
Ms. Payne indicated that the potential for a partner’s student visa to transition into a permanent skills-based visa could pressure victims to remain in unsafe relationships for the sake of immigration security. When asked about whether the exclusions were unintentional, she expressed her belief that it was a deliberate choice, calling it unjust.
Ms. Liao noted that many clients are unaware of their immigration status, leading to further complications. “We have seen individuals leave abusive relationships without understanding their visa conditions, including those who are already permanent residents, not realizing they could exit those relationships without fear of deportation,” she said.
These complex issues highlight the urgent need for reform within the Department of Home Affairs to ensure that migrant victims of domestic violence receive the support they need without unnecessary barriers.
