Ministerial Discretion in Immigration: Unchecked Power Over Individual Lives

The Power No One Voted For

Imagine a government official - not a judge, not a jury, not an elected parliament - having the personal power to imprison you indefinitely, cancel your right to live in Australia, or override an independent tribunal that ruled in your favour. No meaningful appeal. No requirement to explain the decision publicly. No parliamentary vote.

This is not a hypothetical. This is Section 501 of the Migration Act 1958, and the broader system of ministerial discretion that sits at the heart of Australian immigration law.

Both Labor and the Coalition have expanded and defended these powers. And most Australians have no idea how far they extend.

What Is Ministerial Discretion?

Under the Migration Act, the Immigration Minister holds a sweeping set of personal powers that exist outside the normal administrative review process. These include:

• Cancelling visas on "character grounds" - a definition broad enough to include a single minor conviction, or even an association with people who have criminal records
• Overriding decisions by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), both in favour of and against visa holders
• Detaining people indefinitely - Australia is one of the only liberal democracies with no statutory time limit on immigration detention
• Issuing "conclusive certificates" that block courts from reviewing certain decisions on national security grounds

The minister does not have to personally review every case. Many decisions are delegated to departmental officers acting under ministerial authority. But the minister can personally intervene at any time - and those interventions are not subject to merits review.

Who Gets Caught in This System?

The most visible victims of Section 501 cancellations are long-term residents who came to Australia as children, grew up here, and later received a criminal conviction. Many have no meaningful connection to their country of birth. Some don't speak the language. Yet they can be deported - separated from Australian partners, children, and parents - on ministerial discretion.

Between 2014 and 2023, visa cancellations under Section 501 increased by over 600%. In the 2022–23 financial year alone, more than 2,300 visas were cancelled on character grounds. Many of those people were held in immigration detention - at a cost to taxpayers of approximately $400 per person per day, or roughly $146,000 per detainee per year.

In 2023, the High Court ruled in NZYQ v Minister for Immigration that indefinite detention of people who cannot be deported is unlawful. The government was forced to release over 140 long-term detainees almost overnight - people who had been held for years with no prospect of removal. The fact that it took a High Court intervention to end this practice tells you everything about the accountability gap in this system.

Why Does This Policy Exist?

Ministerial discretion in immigration persists for a simple reason: it is politically useful.

It allows governments to appear tough on border security without passing new legislation. It gives ministers a visible lever to pull when a high-profile case generates media attention. And because the people most affected - visa holders, refugees, non-citizens - cannot vote, there is no direct electoral consequence for abuse.

The Morrison government used Section 501 aggressively as part of a broader "tough on crime" immigration narrative. The Albanese government inherited the same powers and has not moved to meaningfully constrain them. Both major parties benefit from the discretion. Neither has a strong incentive to give it up.

The legal community, refugee advocates, and human rights organisations have criticised these powers for years. The Australian Human Rights Commission has repeatedly called for mandatory time limits on detention and greater transparency in cancellation decisions. These recommendations are noted, tabled, and largely ignored.

The Accountability Gap

Here is the core problem in plain terms:

The minister is appointed, not elected. Their individual decisions affect thousands of lives. And the review mechanisms are either slow, expensive, or simply unavailable.

What Would Australians Choose?

Polling consistently shows that Australians support fair processes, not just tough outcomes. When people understand that long-term residents who grew up in Australia are being deported for offences they served time for - separated from their Australian-born children - support for blanket cancellation powers drops sharply.

The public generally supports strong borders. But most Australians also believe in procedural fairness: that decisions affecting someone's life should be made transparently, with proper review, by an accountable process - not by a single minister wielding unchecked personal power.

If Australians were asked directly - should one minister be able to detain a person indefinitely with no time limit and no independent review? - the answer would almost certainly be no.

That gap between what politicians have quietly legislated and what citizens would actually choose is exactly what Direct Democracy exists to close.

This Is Why Your Vote Needs to Mean More

Under the current system, you vote for a party every three years and hope they govern well. You have no direct say on whether ministerial discretion in immigration is too broad. You have no mechanism to demand a statutory time limit on detention. You cannot instruct your representative to support an independent review of Section 501 cancellations.

Direct Democracy changes that. Our members vote directly on policy positions. Our elected representatives are bound to follow those instructions - not the preferences of a minister, a party donor, or a media cycle.

Immigration policy should reflect what Australians actually value: security and fairness, firm borders and human dignity. Right now, it reflects what is politically convenient for whoever holds the ministerial pen.

---

Ready to have a real say? Take our policy quiz at [directdemocracy.com.au](https://directdemocracy.com.au) to see where you stand on the issues that matter - and find out how Direct Democracy would put your voice back into the decisions that shape Australia.