12 March 2024
Mr Johny Sebastian
BY EMAIL: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
In reply please quote:
FOI Request: FA 23/10/00061-R1
File Number:
FA23/10/00061
Dear Mr Sebastian
Decision on Internal Review – Freedom of Information Act 1982
I refer to your correspondence dated 23 October 2023 in which you requested that the
Department of Home Affairs (the Department) review its decision on access to documents
dated 11 October 2023 under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act).
1
Scope of original request
The scope of your original request for access to documents under the FOI Act was as follows:
Any policy, procedure, guidelines and/or ministerial directives in the year 2023
regarding the general processing (i.e. non-case specific) and decision making of
Subclass 309 Partner (Provisional) visa at New Delhi Processing Office
2
Original decision on access dated 11 October 2023
The original decision maker identified the following documents as falling within the scope of
the FOI request:
•
Procedural Instruction - Subclass 309 Partner Provisional visa (with links to associated
legislation / policy) (28/07/20223)
•
Direction 102 - Order for considering and disposing of Family visa applications
(09/02/2023)
•
LIN23/026 - Migration (specification of evidentiary requirements - family violence)
Instrument (31/03//2023)
However the original decision maker decided that, pursuant to section 12(1)(b) of the FOI Act,
these were documents to which the FOI Act does not apply.
Level 4, 808 Bourke Street DOCKLANDS VIC 3008
GPO Box 241 MELBOURNE VIC 3000
• www.homeaffairs.gov.au
1
3
Request for internal review
On 23 October 2023, you requested the Department review its decision dated 11 October
2023.
The terms of your review request were as follows:
In the decision letter, it was mentioned that the requested information is available at
LEGENDCOM, and I am advised to subscribe to the platform for access. However, I
wish to express my concern that my original request may have been misinterpreted, as
the information I am seeking is not, to the best of my knowledge, available at
LEGENDCOM.
I would like to bring to your attention that the Department has accommodated similar
requests in the past, providing the requested information on the following occasions:
24 July 2019 - FA 19/03/0064213
July 2021 - FA 21/02/01000
In light of this, I kindly request the Department to conduct a thorough internal review of
my case and reconsider the decision.
I believe that the information sought is within the scope of the FOI Act 1982, and I trust
that the Department wil uphold its commitment to transparency.
4
Scope of internal review
Based on the terms of your internal review in paragraph 3 above, I consider you are seeking
review of:
•
the Department’s decision that the FOI Act does not apply to the documents within the
scope of the request
•
the adequacy of the searches conducted by the Department.
5
Authority to make decision
I am authorised under section 23 the FOI Act to make decisions to release and to refuse access
to exempt documents and to conduct internal reviews.
6
Relevant material
In reaching my decision I referred to the following:
•
the terms of your request
•
the submission made by you in support of your request for internal review
•
the documents identified as falling within the scope of your request
•
information held on departmental systems
•
the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act)
•
Guidelines published by the Office of the Information Commissioner under section 93A
of the FOI Act (the FOI guidelines)
2
•
advice from Departmental officers with responsibility for matters relating to the
documents to which you sought access.
7
Internal review decision
I have decided to vary the Departments original decision and replace it with the following
decision:
•
That seventeen (17) additional documents fall within the scope of your request, and in
relation to these documents:
o to release twelve documents in part, with exempt and irrelevant material deleted
o to release two documents in part, with exempt material deleted
o to release three documents in full, without deletions
o to rely upon sections 37(2)(b) and 47E(d) of the FOI Act in finding material in the
documents to be exempt
o to rely upon section 22 of the FOI Act in granting access to edited copies, from
which irrelevant material has been deleted
•
in relation to the three (3) documents identified as falling within the scope of the request
in the original decision:
o section 12(1)(b) does not apply to the documents
o section 12(1)(c) does apply to the documents
o accordingly, these documents are documents to which the FOI Act does not apply
and the Departments decision to refuse access is affirmed.
Attachment A is a schedule which describes the relevant documents and sets out my decision
in relation to each of them.
I have provided the reasons for my decision below.
8
Reasons for internal review decision: documents within scope
I have reviewed the documents that fall within the scope of this request and considered the
submissions made by you in relation to your reasons for requesting an internal review.
I have determined that further reasonable searches for documents could be undertaken by the
Department. The Department has undertaken additional reasonable searches for documents
within the scope of your request.
As a result of these searches, the Department has identified 34 additional documents as falling
within the scope of your request. These documents are listed in the schedule of documents at
Attachment A.
9
Reasons for internal review decision: whether reasonable searches conducted
Section 24A of the FOI Act provides that the Department must take all reasonable steps to
locate documents within the scope of the request. I have accordingly given consideration to
the searches undertaken by the Department in response to your original request and request
for internal review.
3
Searches for documents in response to original request
Searches for documents in response to the original request were undertaken by the business
area responsible for the matters contained in the documents to which you sought access, the
Family Visas Branch of the Immigration Programs Division.
The relevant business area advised that the documents identified in paragraph 2 above were
within the scope of the request, but noted that these documents are available on LEGEND, the
Department’s electronic database of migration and citizenship legislation and policy
documents.
Searches for documents in response to internal review request
In response to your request for internal review, I requested that the Family Visas Branch
consider your internal review submission that additional documents were located for requests
of a similar nature and that they conduct additional searches to identify any further documents
falling within the scope of your current request.
These searches involved:
•
searches of email accounts maintained by operational areas, including email
correspondence with the global processing network
•
searches for emails, guidelines and other procedural documents held on HP Content
Manager (TRIM), the department’s electronic document and records management
system
•
searches for guidelines and other procedural documents stored on local shared drives
maintained by the business area
•
enquiries to the Department’s New Delhi processing office to determine whether any
relevant documents existed specific to that processing office, including any document
held on local drives.
Outcomes of searches
The Family Visas Branch advised that, in addition to the documents available on LEGENDcom,
they had located a further seventeen (17) documents within the scope of the request. These
documents consist of:
•
guidelines/instructions for processing subclass 309 visa applications (6 documents)
•
internal emails referring to the processing of subclass 309 visa applications (11
documents)
Whether all reasonable steps taken to locate documents
Paragraph 3.88 of the FOI Guidelines notes that the Act is silent on what constitutes ‘all
reasonable steps’ to search for a document, but suggests that the term should be:
‘construed as not going beyond the limit assigned by reason, not extravagant or excessive,
moderate and of such as amount, size or number as is judged to be appropriate or suitable
to the circumstances or purpose’.
4
Paragraph 3.89 of the FOI Guidelines further provides that, at a minimum, an agency’s
searches for documents should have regard to:
•
the subject matter of the documents
•
the current and past file management systems
•
the record management systems in place
•
the individuals within an agency or minister’s office who may be able to assist with the
location of documents, and
•
the age of the documents.
Having considered the searches conducted and the outcomes of these searches, I am satisfied
that the Department has now undertaken all reasonable steps to locate documents within the
scope of your request. In making that finding, I have had regard to the following:
•
Should relevant documents exist, they would be held on HP Content Manager, local
drives or in email accounts and be identifiable by searches of these systems. Searches
of these systems were conducted by Family Visa Branch and resulted in the identification
of a number of additional relevant documents, as detailed above.
•
The business area consulted, the Family Visa Branch, has overall responsivity for the
Global processing of Partner Visa applications and was best placed to provide advice on
the existence of documents and conduct searches for relevant documents.
•
Additionally the Department visa processing office in New Delhi have confirmed that
there are no additional local instructions or guidelines (formal or informal, including
emails) available to staff at the New Delhi processing office, and that instructions and
guidelines apply across the entire global processing network.
I am therefore satisfied that the Department has taken all the steps to locate all documents
that fall within the scope of your request that it was required to undertake under section 24A
of the FOI Act.
10
Reasons for decision: documents to which the FOI Act does not apply
10.1 Section 12(1)(b) of the FOI Act – documents open to access as part of public
register
Section 12(1)(b) of the FOI Act provides that a person is not entitled to obtain access under
the FOI Act to a document that is open to public access, as part of a public register or
otherwise, in accordance with an enactment or a Norfolk Island law, where that access is
subject to a fee or other charge.
The documents identified as falling within the scope of the request in the original decision are
published on LEGEND, the Department's electronic database of migration and citizenship
legislation and policy documents. As stated in the original decision, the Department makes
access to LEGEND available to members of the public on a subscription basis (known as
LEGENDcom) as well as for non-commercial use through libraries that subscribe to
LEGENDcom through the library deposit and free issue scheme.
I have considered whether LEGEND can be considered to be open to public access as part of
a public register in accordance with an enactment. I consider that, for section 12(1)(b) to apply,
there must be an enactment other than the FOI Act that governs how a person may access
the information. I do not consider that the access to LEGEND that is provided through
LEGENDcom has been provided in accordance with any enactment.
5
I further consider that, while the term ‘public register’ is not defined in the FOI Act, paragraph
2.60 of the FOI Guidelines notes that examples of a public register include a register of births,
deaths and marriages and a consumer protection register. I do not consider that LEGENDcom
is equivalent to a public register.
Based on the above considerations, I have determined that section 12(1)(b) of the FOI Act
does not apply to the documents available on LEGEND.
10.2 Section 12(1)(c) of the FOI Act – documents available for purchase by the public
in accordance with arrangement made by an agency
Section 12(1)(c) of the FOI Act further provides that the FOI Act does not apply to documents
that are available for purchase by the public in accordance with arrangements made by an
agency.
I am satisfied that the documents identified in paragraph 2 above are available on LEGEND,
and can be accessed by the public through a purchased subscription to LEGENDcom.
Accordingly, they are documents available for purchase by the public in accordance with the
arrangements provided through LEGENDcom.
I further consider that the objects of the FOI Act apply only to documents to which the FOI Act
applies. As noted by the Senior Member i
n Lester and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organisation [2014] AATA 646 (5 September 2014), it is the intention of section
12(1) of the FOI Act to exclude from the operation of the FOI Act those documents that are
available via other means. As stated in the discussion regarding section 12(1)(c) of the FOI
Act that appears in Explanatory Memorandum to the 1981 Freedom of Information Bill:
Part 3 does not give a right of access to documents which are otherwise available to
the public. This sub clause specifies three main classes of such documents: ...
The third class comprises documents that are otherwise available for purchase by the
public, for example, from the Australian Government Publishing Service.
The rationale of this clause is that, where statutory provisions or other arrangements
exist that provide from the means of access to particular documents, it would be
inappropriate for access to be granted under the Freedom of information legislation
rather than under those statutes or arrangements.
I have considered your claims that the Department “accommodated similar requests in the
past” in responding to requests FA 21/02/01000 and FA 19/03/00642. However, I note that
only the documents in scope for FA 21/02/01000 included documents available on LEGEND,
and the Department also did not release these documents in responding to that request.
As the FOI Act does not apply to documents that are available for purchase in accordance with
arrangements made by an agency I am satisfied that the documents identified in paragraph 2
are documents to which the FOI Act does not apply, by the operation of section 12(1)(c) of the
FOI Act.
11
Reasons for decision – irrelevant material
11.1 Section 22(1)(a)(ii) of the FOI Act – information irrelevant to request for access
Section 22(1)(a)(i ) of the FOI Act applies if an agency or Minister decides that giving access
to a document would disclose information that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to
the request for access.
6
I have decided that parts of the documents contain information that could reasonably be
regarded as irrelevant to your request.
The material in question reveals the names and contact details of departmental officers.
On 3 October 2023, the Department advised you that its policy is to exclude the personal
details of officers not in the Senior Executive Service (SES), as well as the mobile and work
telephone numbers of SES staff, contained in documents that fall within scope of an FOI
request.
The Department also advised you at this time that if you did not inform the Department that
you sought access to this material, it would consider the information containing the officers’
personal details to be irrelevant to your request.
Following the receipt of the acknowledgement letter, you did not advise the Department that
you sought access to the officers’ personal details, and you also did not specifically indicate in
making your request for an internal review that you required access to this material. I have
consequently determined that this material remains irrelevant to your request under section
22(1)(a)(i ) of the FOI Act.
The remainder of the documents have been considered for release to you as they are relevant
to your request.
12
Reasons for decision – exemptions
12.1 Section 37(2)(b) of the FOI Act – documents affecting enforcement of law and
protection of public safety – prejudice to lawful methods and procedures
Section 37(2)(b) of the FOI Act provides that a document is exempt from disclosure if its
disclosure would, or could reasonably be expected to disclose lawful methods or procedures
for preventing, detecting, investigating, or dealing with matters arising out of breaches or
evasions of the law the disclosure of which would or could reasonably likely to, prejudice the
effectiveness of those methods or procedures.
The Department plays a leading role in assessing risks to Australia's border and is responsible
for managing Australia's visa program under the
Migration Act 1958 (the Migration Act). The
Department undertakes this role in close collaboration with other government agencies,
including the Australian Border Force and other federal law enforcement agencies. As such,
the Department's role includes law enforcement functions.
I consider that the disclosure of material contained in documents numbered 3, 4, and 6 would,
or could reasonably be expected to reveal lawful methods or procedures for preventing or
detecting breaches or evasions of the Migration Act. Disclosure would, or would reasonably
likely to, prejudice the effectiveness of those methods or procedures.
The material to which I have applied this exemption indicates methods used by the Department
to identify and mitigate possible breaches of the Migration Act, including:
•
the use of the CMAL system to provide an alert capacity for individuals and travel
documents
•
the use of safeguards systems to flag decision makers’ attention towards risks that may
be posed by a party involved with an application
•
the use of interviews to establish the veracity of responses provided by visa applicants
and other relevant parties.
7
The material in question provides specific details of how the Department applies the methods
in question, including:
•
examples of when CMAL wil generate an alert
•
how the safeguards system categorises applications based on the risks posed by
particular applications
•
the factors associated with particular safeguards profiles
•
examples of questions to be used in interviews.
I consider that the disclosure of this information would provide potential visa applicants with an
indication of how they can tailor their applications to avoid their categorisation as higher-risk
applications and to evade the additional scrutiny applied by the Department to such
applications. The disclosure of the material would also enable interview subjects to prepare
responses to interview questions that would increase their likelihood of their relationship being
assessed as genuine.
The disclosure of this material would be reasonably likely to compromise the Department’s
capacity to use these methods to detect non-genuine visa applications and mitigate potential
breaches of the Migration Act. Disclosure would therefore reduce the ability of the Department
to maintain the integrity of Australia’s visa program and in turn to protect the borders of
Australia.
I have decided that this information is exempt from disclosure under section 37(2)(b) of the
FOI Act.
13
Reasons for decision – public interest conditional exemptions
13.1 Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act – certain operations of agencies – substantial
adverse effect on agency operations
Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act provides that documents are conditional y exempt if disclosure
would, or could reasonably be expected to, have a substantial adverse effect on the proper
and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency.
I consider that the disclosure of the material identified as exempt under section
47E(d)’ would,
or could reasonably be expected to, have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and
efficient conduct of the operations of the Department.
Managing the security and integrity of Australia's borders is integral to the operations of the
Department. Any prejudice to the effectiveness to operations to support that role would result
in a substantial adverse effect on the operations of the Department.
Material in relation to processing visa applications
Certain material identified as conditionally exempt under 47E(d) of the FOI Act in documents
1,3 and 4 describes procedures used by the Department to process family visa applications.
Specifically, certain material reveals methods used by the Department to categorise and
process particular visa applications and reveals guidance given to visa decision makers about
assessing particular categories of visa applications. I consider that this information, taken
together, would compromise the integrity of the Department’s family visa program by revealing
circumstances in which the Department wil conduct additional checks in relation to particular
applications, as well as disclosing processes used by the Department to determine whether
cases wil be subject to additional scrutiny. I consider the disclosure of this material would
provide visa applicants with an insight into how they can evade the Department’s methods,
8
which would reduce the capacity of the Department to detect fraud or other instances of non-
compliance.
Additionally certain material has been exempted that is intended as guidance from the senior
leadership group in relation to program outcomes. Disclosure of this material has the potential
to be used in unintended ways. Any misuse of this information could undermine the intended
outcomes, or increase the risk that the intended outcomes for the family visa program are not
achieved. Failure to meet the strategic outcomes would have a substantial adverse effect on
the Departments ability to effectively manage the Government’s Permanent Migration
Program,
Operational email addresses
Certain material identified as exempt under section 47E(d) consists of operational email
addresses used by this Department. These email addresses are not otherwise publicly
available, and disclosure of this information could reasonably be expected to result in potential
vexatious communication and public inquiries which these operational areas are not resourced
to manage.
The Department has established channels of communication for members of the public into
the Department, and I consider there is no public interest in disclosing these operational
contact details. Given the operational focus of those business areas, such a diversion of the
resources of that business area could reasonably be expected to have a substantial adverse
effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of this Department and its partner
agencies.
On-line link to internal Departmental system.
Certain material identified as exempt under 47E(d) refers to the on-line location of the
Departments visa management dashboard. This is a restricted internal system that provides
management reports on visa processing.
Disclosure of this information may expose the system and the wider departmental network to
the possibility of unauthorised access by nefarious actors. Any unauthorised access would
have a substantial adverse effect on the operations of the Department by compromising the
integrity of the system and information held within it.
Any risk to the integrity of the information held securely on the system would significantly
compromise the capacity of the Departmental staff to manage the visa program and would also
risk the confidentiality of personal information held on these system, which would result in a
substantial adverse effect on the operations of the Department.
I have decided that the material within the documents identified is exempt under section 47E(d)
of the FOI Act. Access to a conditionally exempt document must generally be given unless it
would be contrary to the public interest to do so. I have turned my mind to whether disclosure
of the information would be contrary to the public interest, and have included my reasoning in
that regard at paragraph below.
13.2 The public interest – section 11A of the FOI Act
A part of a document which is conditionally exempt must also meet the public interest test in
section 11A(5) before an exemption may be claimed in respect of that part.
In summary, the test is whether access to the conditionally exempt part of the document would
be, on balance, contrary to the public interest.
9
In applying this test, I have noted the objects of the FOI Act and the importance of the other
factors listed in section 11B(3) of the FOI Act, being whether access to the document would
do any of the following:
(a) promote the objects of this Act (including all the matters set out in sections 3 and
3A)
(b) inform debate on a matter of public importance
(c) promote effective oversight of public expenditure
(d) allow a person to access his or her own personal information.
Having regard to the above I am satisfied that:
•
Access to the documents would promote the objects of the FOI Act.
•
There is a public interest in the public, including individual visa applicants, being able to
scrutinise the migration program as a whole. Scrutiny gives a basis for insight into the
Government’s activities and so for discussion, comment and review.
•
The documents provide no insight in the public expenditure by the Department.
•
The documents in question do not contain your own personal information.
I have also considered the following factors that weigh against the release of the conditionaly
exempt information in the documents:
•
Disclosure of the parts of the documents that are conditionally exempt under section
47E(d) of the FOI Act could reasonably be expected to prejudice law enforcement
functions and, as a result, the ability of the Department to protect Australia's borders.
•
I consider there to be a strong public interest in ensuring that the ability of the Department
to conduct its law enforcement functions is not compromised or prejudiced in any way. I
consider that this would be contrary to the public interest and that this factor weighs
strongly against disclosure.
•
I consider there to be a strong public interest in the Department being able to effectively
the Permanent Migration Program and the release of any material which could
undermine the attainment of the strategic outcomes is contrary to the public interest.
•
The conditionally exempt information in relation to the Departments IT systems is of
value to individuals or organisations who may be interested in crafting a hostile cyber
security attack on the IT systems of the Department. I consider that this would be contrary
to the public interest and that this factor weighs strongly against disclosure.
•
Disclosure of the operational email addresses which are conditionally exempt under
section 47E(d) of the FOI Act would have a substantial adverse effect on the ability of
the relevant operational areas to conduct their business as usual. The Department has
established avenues in place for members of the public to contact when they have
queries, complaints or comments. I consider that there is a strong public interest in
ensuring public feedback is filtered through these available channels so that operational
areas within the Department are able to carry out their functions in an effective matter. I
consider that this would be contrary to the public interest and that this factor weighs
strongly against disclosure of the exempt information.
10
I have also had regard to section 11B(4) which sets out the factors which are irrelevant to my
decision, which are:
a) access to the document could result in embarrassment to the Commonwealth
Government, or cause a loss of confidence in the Commonwealth Government
b) access to the document could result in any person misinterpreting or misunderstanding
the document
c) the author of the document was (or is) of high seniority in the agency to which the
request for access to the document was made
d) access to the document could result in confusion or unnecessary debate.
I have not taken into account any of those factors in this decision.
Upon balancing all of the above relevant public interest considerations, I have concluded that
the disclosure of the conditionally exempt information in the documents would be contrary to
the public interest and it is therefore exempt from disclosure under the FOI Act.
14
Reasons for decision: access to edited copies
14.1 Section 22(2) – access to edited copies
Section 22(2) of the FOI Act provides that an agency must provide access to an edited copy
of a document when:
• the agency has identified that a document is exempt or contains exempt or irrelevant
material, and
• it is possible for the agency to prepare an edited copy of the document from which it
has deleted the exempt or irrelevant material.
As I have indicated above, certain documents identified within the scope of the request contain
exempt and irrelevant material.
I have determined that it is reasonably practicable to prepare edited copies of the documents
indicated in the schedule of documents, and accordingly have issued you with edited copies
of these documents pursuant to section 22(2) of the FOI Act.
15
Legislation
A copy of the FOI Act is availabl
e at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A02562.
16
Your review rights
Information Commissioner Review
You may apply directly to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) for an
Information Commissioner review of this decision. You must apply in writing within 60 days of
this notice. For further information about review rights and how to submit a request for a review
to the OAIC, please s
ee https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/your-freedom-of-
information-rights/freedom-of-information-reviews/information-commissioner-review.
11
17
Making a complaint
You may complain to the Information Commissioner about action taken by the Department in
relation to your request.
Your enquiries to the Information Commissioner can be directed to:
Phone 1300 363 992 (local call charge)
Email
xxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx
There is no particular form required to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner. The
request should be in writing and should set out the grounds on which it is considered that the
action taken in relation to the request should be investigated and identify the Department of
Home Affairs as the relevant agency.
18
Contact
Should you wish to discuss my decision, please do not hesitate to contact via email at
xxx.xxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx.
electronically signed
Matthew Noble
Position number 60007430 - Authorised Decision Maker
Department of Home Affairs
12
ATTACHMENT A
SCHEDULE OF DOCUMENTS
REQUEST UNDER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
FOI request: FA23/10/00061 R1
File Number: FA23/10/00061
•
Guidelines and Instructions (6 documents)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
1
1 - 19 Guidelines for prioritising
released in full
partner visa applications on
compassionate and
compelling grounds.
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
2
10 - 11 Helpcard 2
released in full
(subclass309/100)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
3
12 - 45 Subclass 309 - Partner
released with exempt
37(2)(b)
Provisional Assessment -
material deleted
Visa Processing Guide
47E(d)
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
4
46 - 47 Initial Triage Process
released with exempt
37(2)(b)
material deleted
47E(d)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
5
48 - 98 Offshore Partner Visa
released in full
Training
13
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
6
99
Instruction Reg1.20KB
released with exempt
37(2)(b)
offences
material deleted
47E(d)
•
Miscellaneous Internal emails (11 documents)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
7
1
Regional weekly update-11 released with exempt
47E(d)
May 2023
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
8
2 - 3 South East Asia Targets
released with exempt
47E(d)
and Irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
9
4
Regional Weekly Update - 25 released with exempt
47E(d)
May 2023
and Irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
10
5
Re: SEA targets
released with exempt 47E(d)
and Irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
11
6
CM: SEA Targets
released with exempt
47E(d)
and Irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
14
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
12
7 - 8 CM: Re SEA Targets
released with exempt
47E(d)
and Irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
13
9 - 11 First Stage Partner Visa -
released with exempt
47E(d)
revised Targets
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
14
12 - 14 Re Partner Program Update released with exempt
47E(d)
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
15
15 - 16 Re: South Asia Region -
released with exempt
47E(d)
Partner Targets
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
16
17
South Asian Region -
released with exempt
47E(d)
Partner Targets 2023 - 24
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
17
18 - 19 Re: South Asia Region -
released with exempt
47E(d)
Partner Targets
and irrelevant material
deleted
22(1)(a)(i )
15
•
Documents available via LEGENDcom (3 documents)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
18
-
Procedural Instruction -
access refused
12(1)(c)
Subclass 309 Partner
Provisional visa (with links
to associated legislation /
policy)
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
19
-
Direction 102 - Order for
access refused
12(1)(c)
considering and disposing of
Family visa applications
No.
Page Description
Number
Decision on release
20
-
LIN23/026 - Migration -
access refused
12(1)(c)
specification of evidentiary
requirements - family
violence Instrument
16
Document Outline
