As an immigration lawyer, I am often reminded that the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) is both rigid and flexible. Its rigidity lies in the prescriptive visa criteria and its flexibility emerges in the recognition of compelling and compassionate circumstances. For example, the Minister’s personal intervention powers under ss 351 and 417 allow for a departure from strict legal outcomes where compassion demands it. These provisions are acknowledgements that law without humanity risks injustice. Compassion is central to immigration law’s legitimacy and the capacity of lawyers to approach this work with compassion is a professional responsibility.
Compassion in the Legal Framework
The Ministerial intervention powers allow the Minister to substitute a decision where it is in the public interest, often in circumstances described as “compelling and compassionate.” In Plaintiff M1-2021 v Minister for Home Affairs (2022), the Federal Court grappled with the balance between statutory character provisions and the applicant’s personal circumstances. While the decision ultimately reinforced ministerial discretion, the reasoning reflected an awareness that compassion is a relevant consideration in balancing statutory objectives with individual circumstances. Similarly, the Kamasee v Commonwealth of Australia (2017) class action, brought on behalf of Manus Island detainees, revealed how systemic neglect of compassion and humane treatment can lead to liability in negligence and false imprisonment. These cases remind me that compassion is not sentiment but rather a safeguard against injustice.
Leadership and Compassion
Compassion is a strong form of leadership. Former High Court Justice Michael Kirby often spoke of the law’s duty to “see the human face behind the legal problem.” In practice, this means recognising that a 482 Skills in Demand visa refusal is not merely a failed application but a disruption to a family’s livelihood, a child’s schooling, or an employer’s workforce stability. While the High Court in Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Lam (2003) 214 CLR 1 rejected the applicant’s claim, Justice Kirby stressed that fairness and compassion are intertwined in administrative law. Justice Emilios Kyrou has also written on the attributes of a good judge, explicitly including compassion alongside independence, impartiality and cultural awareness. His own migrant background informs his view that compassion strengthens rather than weakens judicial authority.
Leaders across the profession echo this. Gillian Triggs, during her tenure as President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, emphasised that compassion is integral to upholding human rights in migration contexts. Her advocacy during the offshore detention debates demonstrated that compassion can be exercised with intellectual rigour and legal precision. I have been fortunate to work with senior practitioners who model compassion toward clients but also toward colleagues. Their example has reminded me that compassion is a form of leadership. It sustains resilience in a demanding field and reminds us why the work matters.
Compassion in Daily Practice
Compassion is most visible in the lawyer-client relationship. I have learned that listening to my clients intently often reveals details that can transform a case. For example, in partner visa matters, departmental policy allows decision-makers to consider compassionate factors. When I draft submissions, I do not simply recite statutory criteria but I frame the client’s lived reality in a way that demonstrates why the law should bend toward the client’s favour.
In my daily work, compassion manifests in small but significant ways:
– Drafting submissions that highlight the lived realities of clients, not just statutory criteria.
– Negotiating with the Department of Home Affairs by framing arguments in terms of both compliance and humanity.
– Advising employers that sponsorship is not just a transaction but a commitment to the wellbeing of a worker and their family.
Immigration law inevitably engages with marginalised populations. Compassion is what drives me to extend my work beyond individual cases to systemic advocacy and policy reform to empower individuals and communities. Compassion is a core strength that allows us to interpret, apply, and sometimes challenge the law in ways that preserve its legitimacy. Without compassion, immigration law would just be about enforcing statute and hitting KPIs.
One of my favourite quotes growing up is by Mahatma Gandhi, “the true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.” I believe that in immigration law, that measure is taken every day and compassion is the standard by which we are judged.
