Implications and Statutory Interpretation of ARJ17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

Running head: MIGRATION LAW
Migration Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

MIGRATION LAW
To
The Employer,
Subject: The Implications and Statutory Interpretation of the case of ARJ17 v Minister for
Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 98.
There has been a considerable amount of development in the Australian Migration Law
that has been witnessed with the case of ARJ17 v Minister for Immigration and Border
Protection1. This present case was an appeal that has been preferred from SZSZM v Ministers
for Immigration & Ors2. This instant case mainly emphasizes upon the right of a person under
common law who is in possession of personal property. The question that has been raised in
this case was the issue that whether any authority was vested upon the Secretary to approve
the blanket policy empowering the officers to effect a search for sim cards and mobile phones
and the seizure of the same, which is in possession of the persons detained in the detention
centres established for the purpose of immigration under section 5(1), 196, 252, 189 and 252
provided in the Migration Act, 1958 (Cth)3. The central aim of this paper emphasizes on the
analysis and identification of the implications, which can be inferred in from this case in
relation to the authority that the secretary possesses for effecting the approval of the blanket
policy, which empowers the officers to initiate a search and to effect a seizure. In addition,
the officers emphasizes method, in which the legal system of Australia functions in relation
to the Migration Law.
The instant case has arisen in relation to the detention of SZSZM and ARJ17 in the
immigration centre in Villawood. It has been submitted in the court that afterwards SZSZM
has been sent to Pakistan owing to which he does not fall within the scope of immigration
detention. The respondents in relation to this instant case had not raised any objection in
1 [2018] FCAFC 98
2 [2017] FCCA 819
3 Migration Act, 1958 (Cth) ss. 5(1), 196, 252, 189 and 252

MIGRATION LAW
relation to the continuity of the present appeal initiated by the SZSZM. The case was
instituted by SZSZM by an application, in which the Federal Circuit Court has decided to
grant an interlocutory injunction in support of the SZSZM, which has the effect of prohibition
in relation to the confiscation and removal of mobile phones that has been found in the
possession of the detainees serving detention in relation to the immigration. Another
proceeding was instituted afterwards by ARJ17 and was dismissed by court for being in
excess of its jurisdiction relating to the same. Subsequently, the application, instituted by
SZSZM, has been dismissed by the court, which challenged the power conferred upon the
respondents in making seizure or confiscating the mobile phones belonging to detainees.
Afterwards the appeal preferred by ARJ17 has been admitted by the court.
The court has been trying two proceedings in this matter. The first matter was the SZSZM
v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection4 from which the second one, namely,
ARJ17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection5 has emerged as an appeal preferred
from the former. The first one is a proceeding decided by the Federal Circuit Court of
Australia from which the second one has been preferred. The validity of the of the policy
authorising the officers to confiscate the mobile and sim cards form the detainees, that has
been developed by the Secretary relating to the Immigration Department has been challenged
by these two proceedings.
The decision of the court has invalidated of the policy that prohibits the possession of sim
cards and mobile phones by the individuals, detained in the detention facilities relating to
immigration. The court has repealed the policy in its decision relating to this case. The policy
was inspired by the minute note formulated by the Australian Border Force. The same has
been formulated owing to the risk of the detainees to plan an escape or indulge into illicit
activities.
4 [2017] FCCA 819
5 [2018] FCAFC 98