Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

AUSTRALIA

Passing go

  • 18 May 2007

Gone are the days when Australian immigration officers would conduct spot-checks of the bedrooms and bathrooms of applicants for a spouse visa. These house searches—disinterested inquiries in the name of the law—reflected a presumption within the Department of Immigration that those seeking to migrate to Australia on the grounds of marriage were guilty of deception unless proven otherwise. Two toothbrushes by the basin. His and her underpants in sufficiently proximate drawers. Letters addressed to both parties as a couple. Such were the critical pieces of evidence which guarded our borders. The form may be different, but the spirit of spot-checks remains alive and well. When Marina, my wife, wished to apply for permanent residence in Australia, the tranche of evidence required by the Australian Government seemed like the paper equivalent of bathroom inspections. Although planning to live in Spain, we had decided to apply for Marina’s residence to avoid reliving past experiences at Tullamarine airport. On Marina’s first journey to Australia prior to our marriage, she was made to feel like an intruder at the gate by an earnest, humourless immigration official who was innately sceptical that anyone on a tourist visa could possibly want to return home after seeing what Australia had to offer. In addition to the residence application, we needed statutory declarations by friends and family detailing our history as a couple, our own statements detailing where and when we met, our periods of cohabitation, our commitment to each other and even our plans for a family. Documentary evidence of joint economic responsibility, financial solvency, medical perfection, photos of us together and all letters between us during periods of separation soon swelled our dossier to a weighty 2kg pile. For this abrogation of the right to privacy, we were charged €10 (around A$17) for the explanatory booklets and application forms, plus €780 (A$1,335) as the application fee. The application form itself was a minefield. Wedged in between ‘Have you, or any other person included in this application, ever committed, or been involved in the commission of war crimes or crimes against humanity or human rights?’ and ‘Do you and your partner intend to maintain a lasting relationship?’ (would we really pay $1,335 if we didn’t?) was the ultimate lie detector test: ‘Did you enter this relationship with your partner solely to gain permanent residence in Australia?’ And all of this before the interview. As a former refugee lawyer, I was accustomed to hostile interrogations