Fears migration changes may fuel coercive control, visa-related abuse

A crackdown on visa overstayers will only embolden abusers who weaponise Australia's migration system, domestic violence victim-survivor advocates say.

The experts say the immigration system has long been documented as a tool of domestic and family violence (DFV), including threats to cancel a visa, report someone to the Department of Home Affairs for potential detention or deportation, or to separate an Australian-born child from their parent.

The warning comes as the federal government and opposition have detailed proposals to overhaul the migration system.

"In my view, the crackdown hands perpetrators more power," immigration lawyer Ann Emmanuel said.

Ms Emmanuel is a principal solicitor at NSW's only specialist community legal centre that advises on all migration and visa types.

She estimated more than 80 per cent of clients at Immigration Advice and Rights Centre's main legal practice faced immigration-related domestic and family violence issues.

Perpetrators could often control their partner's visa application process, passports, and interactions with home affairs.

"We have had clients who we discover together during an appointment are now unlawful," Ms Emmanuel said.

Clients can discover they've been residing in Australia unlawfully because their partner never made a visa application, or never informed them their visa application was rejected according to Ms Emmanuel.

"It's putting victim-survivors in a greater risk of potentially being put in some form of immigration detention when they've done nothing wrong through any fault of their own."

Abusers already using threats of deportation

In his September 17 National Press Club address, Immigration Minister Tony Burke flagged a return to pre-2015 immigration policy where those who overstayed their visa were placed in immigration detention centres.

This week, the Coalition also proposed reinstating intelligence functions in Home Affairs to target overstayers, in a wider plan Angus Taylor called "the biggest cut to immigration in Australian history".

Migrant women are already worried by the announcements, according to Immigrant Women's Speakout Association of NSW CEO, Maria Kissouri.

"[Abusers are] already using those threats of deportation, of detention," she said.

"There's nothing basic and simple about it and so the solutions are not simple and straightforward either," she added, speaking about the complexity of the migration system.

"I would love to see the government take a step back, rather than react to ill-informed ideas about migrants."

University of Melbourne Professor Marie Segrave, who studies the weaponisation of temporary visas, said politicians did not consider the many factors that might lead to women overstaying their visa.

"This commitment from the minister doesn't recognise that it also signals to women that you are not safe.

"In fact, we're trying to get rid of you if you're in this circumstance of overstaying your visa.

In a statement to the ABC, a home affairs spokesperson said domestic and family violence was "not acceptable under any circumstance".

"[The department] is committed to supporting visa holders experiencing DFV and does not encourage clients (visa applicants/holders or sponsors) to stay in a violent or abusive relationship under any circumstance," they said.

The spokesperson also pointed to the department's specialised domestic and family violence support service, which provided victim-survivors with information and support regarding their visa.

Shadow Home Affairs and Immigration Minister Jonno Duniam said the Coalition's policy was directed at "people who have no lawful entitlement to remain in Australia" and aimed "at preventing the deliberate misuse of temporary visa and review processes".

"It is not in any way about punishing victims of domestic or family violence," he told the ABC.

"The Coalition also recognises that coercive control can involve a perpetrator withholding documents, misleading someone about their visa status and/or deliberately allowing a victim to become unlawful without their knowledge.

"Those circumstances plainly need to be taken into account when individual cases are considered."

One Nation was also contacted for comment.

Many systems enabling abusers have faced fresh scrutiny amid a renewed focus on eradicating domestic and family violence from Australia.

Professor Segrave questioned why the migration system was not one of them.

In 2024, the federal government overhauled the system to introduce a safety net for applicants to apply for permanent residency without staying with their abuser.

But advocates criticised its process, including that it asks for proof the relationship is "genuine" via documents that usually do not exist.

Ms Emmanuel acknowledged the safety net had been "life-changing" for those who could access it but also "piecemeal".

"The protections under the migration system, which we call the family violence provisions, only apply once an application for a certain kind of visa has been made," she said.

"So the promise of making an application is still a very effective tool for coercion that perpetrators continue to use and exploit."

Push for a temporary visa that addresses abuse

The National Advocacy Group on Women on Temporary Visas Experiencing Violence recently issued a blueprint, detailing changes that would make a difference to migration-related abuse.

One of the recommendations was to introduce a new, three-year visa to protect victim-survivors, allowing them time to seek help and safety.

The temporary visa would allow them to work or study and access Medicare and social security payments, with the possibility of extension to deal with ongoing issues such as family court cases.

Ms Emmanuel said this change would be "life-changing and life-saving".

"It would take away the power of perpetrators to use visa status as another form of control and coercion," she said.

Mr Duniam said the Coalition had not announced a visa of this type in its current immigration policy but remained "open to considering practical proposals that would genuinely improve the protection available to victim-survivors who fall outside the existing family violence provisions".

"It is our very firm view that Australia can maintain the integrity of its migration system while also treating victims of domestic and family violence with compassion and common sense," he said.

Professor Segrave called for a guarantee that any future migration changes would factor in safety nets.

"It would be transformative from the outset to say that we understand that some people will be in circumstances of abuse and exploitation," she said.

"And that, if that is you, we have a pathway for you.