Ministerial Intervention After an ART Decision — When It Is Possible and What a Request Needs

MARN 1576536

What ministerial intervention is

Sections 351 and 417 of the Migration Act 1958 give the Minister a personal, non-compellable power to substitute a more favourable decision for a decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal (or the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal) if the Minister thinks it is in the public interest. Section 351 applies to migration decisions, section 417 to protection decisions. The power exists because the visa system cannot anticipate every situation; it is used sparingly and the Minister publishes guidelines on the circumstances in which a case may be referred.

When a request can be made

A request is only possible after the Tribunal has made a decision on the matter. A refusal that has not been reviewed, or a review application lodged out of time and not accepted, does not open the power. A request is generally made once; repeat requests are not considered unless there is significant new information or a change in circumstances. Requests are lodged with the Department, which assesses them against the guidelines and decides whether to refer the case to the Minister; most are finalised at that stage without referral.

What the Minister’s guidelines look for

• Strong compassionate circumstances that, if not recognised, would cause serious, ongoing and irreversible harm to an Australian citizen or permanent resident, particularly a child.
• Circumstances that bring Australia’s obligations under international law into consideration, where the person is not otherwise protected.
• Unintended consequences of the legislation leading to unfair or unreasonable outcomes in the particular case.
• Exceptional economic, scientific, cultural or other benefit to Australia from the person remaining.
• Circumstances that the Tribunal could not consider because of the limits of its powers or because they arose after the decision.

Cases that simply disagree with the Tribunal, or that restate the same facts, do not meet the guidelines. The request has to show what is unique or exceptional, with evidence that was not or could not have been before the Tribunal, organised around the guideline headings.

Status, bridging visas and work rights

Lodging a request does not itself grant a visa or stop removal. A bridging visa may be granted while a first request that meets the guidelines is assessed, often without work rights unless financial hardship is shown. A person who is unlawful when the request is made needs the bridging visa question dealt with immediately. If the request is finalised without intervention, the person is expected to depart and the bridging visa, if any, ends shortly after.

Why most requests fail

Because they are written as a last appeal rather than as a public-interest case; because they repeat the Tribunal file; because the compassionate circumstances are real but ordinary, and the guidelines require more; or because a visa path still existed and the Department expects it to be used first. The honest assessment at the start, whether there is anything in the case that the guidelines recognise, is the most valuable part of the work, because a weak request consumes the one opportunity.

Send WIDEN a confidential enquiry

Tell us briefly what you received and the date on the letter. If the deadline is close, say so and we will prioritise it. These matters are handled in the extended consultation; the enquiry form is for sending the documents ahead of it, not for free advice.

General information only, current at October 2026; not advice on your own case. Outcomes depend on the Department’s assessment of each application; no registered migration agent can guarantee a result (Code of Conduct, Migration Agents Regulations). Keshab Chapagain, MARN 1576536.