She [Prasad's second wife] said that his first wife had visited him every year but that he had told her that the woman was his niece
Former Fiji Labour Party senator Bijai Prasad, now Fiji First Party Vice President
Bijai Prasad and Minister Assisting the Minister of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs [1993] AATA 209; (1993) 17 AAR 520 (1993) 30 ALD 292 (8 July 1993); Citizenship - [1993] AATA 209; (1993) 17 AAR 520;[1993] AATA 209; (1993) 30 ALD 292
"It is not in dispute that on 21 May 1992 the applicant was convicted in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria of committing a breach of section 50(1) of the Act, namely making a false statement; he was fined $750 and ordered to pay $500 costs. Consequently, the criterion set by paragraph (a) of section 21(1) for the exercise of the respondent's discretion to deprive the applicant of his Australian citizenship is met. "
"In August 1991 the applicant lodged an application for grant of Australian citizenship... On 2 September 1991 the application for citizenship was approved...Four days later the second wife's son called at the Department's office and delivered two letters of complaint written by his mother. She asked what had been done about the information that she had previously given about the applicant. She opposed the granting of citizenship to him on the ground that, once it was granted, his first wife would return to live with him. She stated also that he had "got a police record" having stolen $10,000 from Qantas. She threatened that if she got "no results" she would "get Hinch on to it". In the second letter she asked that matters be speeded up. She said that his first wife had visited him every year but that he had told her that the woman was his niece. She believed that he had plans to divorce herself and bring his first wife to Australia once he had his citizenship. She gave details of a man in Fiji who alleged that the applicant owed him $100,000. She said that she would "leave it till 18/20 Sept. 1991 before I hand it to Hinch". She wrote that she had been trying for one year "to get some results".
"Among the T documents there is a file note dated 23 September 1991 stating that the wife and her son had called in to lodge further documents. One was a letter written by a man in Fiji alleging that the applicant had cheated him of $10,000 and had not divorced his first wife. The second document was a copy of a statement by that person to the Fiji police about the $10,000, together with a copy of an agreement for the purchase of land in respect of which the $10,000 had allegedly been paid. There was also a note signed by a person in Fiji setting out details of the applicant's alleged police record in Fiji. The Department then immediately requested the Australian Embassy in Fiji to verify that information and on 4 October 1991 the Embassy replied that it had received verbal confirmation of it. Early in January 1992 the Department received from the Australian Embassy in Suva a copy of a letter written to it by the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Fiji Police which confirmed that the applicant had been convicted on 20 July 1983 in Fiji of larceny by servant and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The offence had involved $20,000 which had disappeared from the air terminal deposit safe at Nadi airport where the applicant had been employed. The writer stated that he had personally been in charge of the investigation, that information previously provided to the Embassy that the applicant had no adverse record was incorrect and that his Department was investigating the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the record. Following the receipt of that information the applicant was charged in the Magistrates' Court in Melbourne with making a false statement contrary to section 50(1)(a) of the Act. He pleaded guilty and, as stated above, was convicted, fined $750 and ordered to pay $500 costs. "
"When cross-examined, he acknowledged that at the time of his application for permanent resident status he had known that persons who were refugees could apply for refugee status and that he had chosen not to take that course but rather to seek permanent residence because he was living in a de facto marital relationship. He gave evidence that he had been a candidate for election to a communal roll seat, representing the Alliance Party, in the 1982 general election in Fiji but had been defeated by the National Federation Party candidate. He said that after the military coup in May 1987 he had been taken in for questioning on three occasions. It had been alleged that he had stopped children from going to school, that he had incited farmers not to cut sugar cane and that he had opposed shops closing on Sunday. He had been detained for periods of between 30 minutes and 4 hours. He said that he had been arrested because of complaints made against him by Indian people who had been opposed to his political views...He gave evidence that at the time of the theft of the money for which he was convicted he had been working for the Nadi Airport Authority after ceasing his employment with Qantas. It is to be noted that in his application for permanent resident status, when required to give details of all employment during the previous ten years, he did not include that employment...Consequently, the criterion set by paragraph (a) of section 21(1) for the exercise of the respondent's discretion to deprive the applicant of his Australian citizenship is met." Read full judgment HERE
"It is not in dispute that on 21 May 1992 the applicant was convicted in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria of committing a breach of section 50(1) of the Act, namely making a false statement; he was fined $750 and ordered to pay $500 costs. Consequently, the criterion set by paragraph (a) of section 21(1) for the exercise of the respondent's discretion to deprive the applicant of his Australian citizenship is met. "
"In August 1991 the applicant lodged an application for grant of Australian citizenship... On 2 September 1991 the application for citizenship was approved...Four days later the second wife's son called at the Department's office and delivered two letters of complaint written by his mother. She asked what had been done about the information that she had previously given about the applicant. She opposed the granting of citizenship to him on the ground that, once it was granted, his first wife would return to live with him. She stated also that he had "got a police record" having stolen $10,000 from Qantas. She threatened that if she got "no results" she would "get Hinch on to it". In the second letter she asked that matters be speeded up. She said that his first wife had visited him every year but that he had told her that the woman was his niece. She believed that he had plans to divorce herself and bring his first wife to Australia once he had his citizenship. She gave details of a man in Fiji who alleged that the applicant owed him $100,000. She said that she would "leave it till 18/20 Sept. 1991 before I hand it to Hinch". She wrote that she had been trying for one year "to get some results".
"Among the T documents there is a file note dated 23 September 1991 stating that the wife and her son had called in to lodge further documents. One was a letter written by a man in Fiji alleging that the applicant had cheated him of $10,000 and had not divorced his first wife. The second document was a copy of a statement by that person to the Fiji police about the $10,000, together with a copy of an agreement for the purchase of land in respect of which the $10,000 had allegedly been paid. There was also a note signed by a person in Fiji setting out details of the applicant's alleged police record in Fiji. The Department then immediately requested the Australian Embassy in Fiji to verify that information and on 4 October 1991 the Embassy replied that it had received verbal confirmation of it. Early in January 1992 the Department received from the Australian Embassy in Suva a copy of a letter written to it by the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department of the Fiji Police which confirmed that the applicant had been convicted on 20 July 1983 in Fiji of larceny by servant and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The offence had involved $20,000 which had disappeared from the air terminal deposit safe at Nadi airport where the applicant had been employed. The writer stated that he had personally been in charge of the investigation, that information previously provided to the Embassy that the applicant had no adverse record was incorrect and that his Department was investigating the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the record. Following the receipt of that information the applicant was charged in the Magistrates' Court in Melbourne with making a false statement contrary to section 50(1)(a) of the Act. He pleaded guilty and, as stated above, was convicted, fined $750 and ordered to pay $500 costs. "
"When cross-examined, he acknowledged that at the time of his application for permanent resident status he had known that persons who were refugees could apply for refugee status and that he had chosen not to take that course but rather to seek permanent residence because he was living in a de facto marital relationship. He gave evidence that he had been a candidate for election to a communal roll seat, representing the Alliance Party, in the 1982 general election in Fiji but had been defeated by the National Federation Party candidate. He said that after the military coup in May 1987 he had been taken in for questioning on three occasions. It had been alleged that he had stopped children from going to school, that he had incited farmers not to cut sugar cane and that he had opposed shops closing on Sunday. He had been detained for periods of between 30 minutes and 4 hours. He said that he had been arrested because of complaints made against him by Indian people who had been opposed to his political views...He gave evidence that at the time of the theft of the money for which he was convicted he had been working for the Nadi Airport Authority after ceasing his employment with Qantas. It is to be noted that in his application for permanent resident status, when required to give details of all employment during the previous ten years, he did not include that employment...Consequently, the criterion set by paragraph (a) of section 21(1) for the exercise of the respondent's discretion to deprive the applicant of his Australian citizenship is met." Read full judgment HERE
