The Law Council of Australia has rejected suggestions of widespread misconduct within the migration law sector, stressing that current oversight systems allow for disciplinary action against individual practitioners who violate professional standards.

Regulatory safeguards in place

President Tania Wolff clarified that migration lawyers are bound by identical ethical requirements as other legal professionals, particularly the obligation to avoid deceiving judicial bodies or government officials.

“Where those obligations are breached, there should be consequences, and the regulatory framework in every state and territory provides for them,” Wolff said in a statement.

She said the Department of Home Affairs should promptly refer any evidence of misconduct to the relevant regulator. Regulators can investigate allegations and impose sanctions, including fines, conditions on practising certificates, suspension, or removal from practice. Courts can also refer practitioners to regulators.

Professional standards emphasized

Wolff warned against framing misconduct as a profession-wide problem, highlighting the detailed nature of migration law and its critical impact on clients’ futures.

“Great care is needed, though, not to suggest a systemic failure across the profession,” she said.

Wolff emphasised that lawyers owe their vital duty to the court and the administration of justice. Lawyers must exercise independent judgement rather than act as a mouthpiece for their clients and must avoid conduct likely to diminish public confidence in the administration of justice.

Migration Act requirements

According to the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), lawyers conducting migration litigation must certify that proceedings have reasonable prospects of success. Those who encourage hopeless proceedings can face personal costs orders.

Section 351 considerations

Regarding section 351 of the Act, Wolff explained that the Minister’s personal power to make a more favourable decision in the public interest is generally available only after a visa refusal has been affirmed by the Administrative Review Tribunal. She said this process may provide the only available pathway for applicants with genuinely compelling circumstances.

She clarified that when lawyers transparently articulate their application justifications to both the department and tribunal while adhering to statutory procedures, such actions do not constitute inappropriate behavior.

Collaborative approach proposed

The Law Council expressed openness to engaging in constructive dialogue with government authorities about legitimate concerns, while advocating for professional consultations that maintain the independence of the legal profession. The organization reiterated that an independent legal profession plays a vital role in helping everyone in Australia, including migrants, understand and assert their legal rights.