New Zealander with no serious convictions being deported from WA

The West Australian reports that a New Zealander without serious convictions is being deported.

New Zealand-born Joel Royston Makaea, 34, was arrested and taken into immigration detention in Perth on Monday after the Immigration Minister revoked his visa on “character” grounds.

Under changes to the Migration Act introduced in December, the minister has the power to cancel the visa of anyone involved in an organisation or gang that was reasonably suspected of being involved in criminal activity.

The person targeted for deportation does not have to be convicted of a serious offence, or even charged with one.

It is understood he has only a limited criminal history during his time in Australia, with his most recent charges relating to disorderly conduct and driving under the influence of drugs.

Is this going to be another controversial vase?

Mr Makaea, who is believed to be a father of six, is the sergeant-at-arms of the Rebels’ Bentley-based chapter and has lived in Perth since March 2005.

So he moved to WA when he was about 24.

His fellow Rebels gang members do have form, including the current and former presidents of the Bentley chapter, who are both awaiting trial on drug trafficking charges.

According to Australian Visa cancellations under section 501 “association with persons suspected of engaging in criminal conduct” is sufficient grounds for cancelation of a visa.

Immigration and Border Protection Minister Peter Dutton would not comment on the specifics of Mr Makaea’s case yesterday.

He made no apologies for the hard line taken by his Government, saying the involvement of bikies in serious and organised crime was well documented and community safety had to come first.

“Criminal bikie groups sell and distribute ice and are involved in other serious crime,” he said.

“On that basis, through a provision within the Migration Act, I can decide that their visas will be cancelled and they will be going back to their country of birth.

“Coming to Australia and remaining here on a visa is a privilege — not a right.

“If that privilege is abused, then they should expect to have their visa cancelled and be sent packing from our country.”

That’s the new tough Australian approach to visas.

Mr Makaea does have the right to appeal against the decision but would need to demonstrate that he was not a person of bad character.

Assumptiions shouldn’t be made from appearances but he may need to do more than present his photo.

WA bikie faces deportation

Leave a comment

23 Comments

  1. To paraphrase the words and some attitudes to the situation for application in New Zealand.

    “Criminal bikie groups sell and distribute drugs and are involved in other serious crime.
    On that basis, anyone who associates with someone from a bike group will be incarcerated. Charges will not be necessary.”

    Reply
  2. traveller

     /  12th November 2015

    I know an older HA never. He has been refused entry to Australia and he doesn’t even have a conviction. They’re big on association and also actively refuse entry, so why wouldn’t they send known associates packing. Say what you like about looks Pete but surprise he’s got character issues – not.

    Reply
    • Robbers Dog

       /  12th November 2015

      The lazy media here won’t look too deeply into this. A close friend of mine who is a NSW cop, has told me numerous times about the Rebels and what they are in to. Even more shameful is that this gang now has a very strong Maori presence and it is the opinion of the police there that this has only served to escalate the violence associated with their activities.

      Anyone in any doubt as to the character of the above gentleman should look into what the role of “Sergeant-at-Arms” actually entails in one of these gangs.

      Reply
      • kittycatkin

         /  12th November 2015

        I do wonder why he is a member of this gang; he can’t pretend that he doesn’t know what they do. I suspect that he just hasn’t been caught doing much other than these minor charges..

        Reply
        • kittycatkin

           /  12th November 2015

          He was a fool to take this photo; the dark glasses inside, facial and hand tattoos prominent (the body tattoos don’t scream ‘gang member !’ but the others do) and general appearance make him look like a gang member. If he wanted to make a good impression and look like someone whom no country would not want, he should have taken off the dark glasses, kept his hands out of sight and turned his head a bit to play down the face tats.

          Reply
  3. Nelly Smickers

     /  12th November 2015

    My concern is, that when these people are deported back to New Zealand, they will simply blend into society and not be recognized. Maybe we should consider making them have something tattooed on their forehead?

    Oh wait…….. 🙂

    Reply
  4. traveller

     /  12th November 2015

    Got to stop using iPad to post here. Too much autocorrect. “Never” meant to be “member”

    Reply
  5. Brown

     /  12th November 2015

    This is a sensible development in some ways but leads to the potential to punish law abiding people that the authorities may come to dislike. Muslim and communist countries do it very well with other religions and Obama has done it, via the IRS, to political opponents. For this individual its just the delayed arrival of significant consequences for poor choices. If anyone thinks gang members (and not club members – intelligent people know the difference) are not involved in bad things as the norm rather than the exception by association they need educating.

    Reply
  6. Joe Bloggs

     /  12th November 2015

    I’m going out on a limb here but in my view there are issues with the way this guy is being treated, specifically around the anticipatory presumption of guilt by association.

    His “type” is not one that I’m comfortable being around, but even so, isn’t one of the tenets of our Western legal system “innocent until proven guilty”?

    One might just as easily say, that middle-aged white-collar workers defraud their employers and commit other serious crimes, therefore if you’re a middle-aged white-collar worker you risk deportation, even if you are caught DIC or intoxicated in a public place… I appreciate that this might seem a facile argument but scratch beneath the surface for a moment and consider the implications of deportation without committing serious crimes.

    Reply
    • kittycatkin

       /  12th November 2015

      Actually, not all Western societies do have ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ The Napoleonic Code is the other way around; this really surprised me.

      Oh, I will miss my old man who was a Human Encyclopaedia on such things. No need for Google when he was around, at least for things like this and a number of others. The Human Encyclopaedia was great to have around.

      Reply
  7. I really don’t understand why this is so hard for some people. When you live in someone else’s country, you have no right to stay there. At all. You are a guest. If you are a guest, you are courteous and follow the rules. If you can’t do that, you get kicked out, and nobody should offer you sympathy. Don’t go to someone else’s country and join a gang. They will deport your arse.

    Reply
    • Jeeves

       /  12th November 2015

      There is no rule against joining a gang.
      Just like there’s no rule about being a lunatic right wing fundamentalist god botherer like yourself.
      And they aren’t being deported- they are being detained indefinitely.

      I really don’t understand why this is so hard for [some people] YOU…oh wait I do..
      You are a fundamentalist extremist who lives his life according to a fantasy straight out of Hubbardville.

      Reply
      • kittycatkin

         /  12th November 2015

        There may not be rules against joining a gang, but if it’s a gang of criminals one must wonder why people are joining it. If I joined the local Bridge Club, which I never would because I am useless at card games, people would assume that I liked to play bridge. If I joined the locat Art Group, people would assume that I aspired to be an artist. If I joined the Hell’s Angels….

        Reply
      • jaspa

         /  12th November 2015

        “There is no rule against joining a gang.”

        No, but if you look at PG’s post https://yournz.org/2015/11/12/australian-visa-cancellations-under-section-501/, you will see there is a rule about cancelling the visas of persons involved in criminal gangs.

        “A person does not pass the character test under subsection 501(6)(b) if the person ‘has or has had an association with someone else, or with a group or organisation, whom the Minister reasonably suspects has been or is involved in criminal conduct’.”

        If you believe a Sergeant-at-Arms of the Rebels is not involved in criminal conduct, I know of a lovely bridge you may be interested in. 🙂

        Reply
      • First of all, you lose if you can’t argue the point I made without attacking me personally. My personal faith has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this issue (except in a very general “life philosophy” sense, of course).

        Second of all, you kind of made my point. You’re free to believe anything you want in a country if you are a citizen. You don’t have that privilege if you are not. It’s perfectly legitimate to deny someone entry, or cancel their visa, based on character issues and the propagation of undesirable beliefs. You may just not be the sort of person they want in their country. Tough shit, it’s their call.

        Thirdly, I’m nowhere near a “religious fundamentalist”, as you call it, just a faithful Orthodox Christian, and my political views are mostly libertarian. I’m pretty sure actual religious fundamentalists think I’m going to hell. And I have no idea what Hubbardville is, but I’m pretty sure I don’t live there.

        Reply
        • kittycatkin

           /  12th November 2015

          You are Orthodox ??? Which church ???

          Reply
        • Jeeves

           /  13th November 2015

          The Fundamentalism of the Orthodox Ecumenists
          by Archimandrite Cyprian Agiokyprianites
          “Fundamentalism” is rendered in Greek as “foundationalism” (fundamentum= themelion [ or “foundation”—Tr. ]); we can simultaneously mean, by fundamentalism, a simple adherence to the “foundations” of faith, or of an ideology, etc., deliberated by the standard of genuineness and authenticity; or, again, witless conservatism and unhealthy zeal;

          Reply
          • You don’t even understand who you are quoting and what the issues are. Agiokyprianites is an Old Calendar Schismatic – a group of people who broke away from the Orthodox Church because of a shift to align feast days with the Gregorian calendar in some jurisdictions. These people are the very definition of “religious extremist”! He uses the word “fundamentalism” as a slur not to suggest that mainstream Orthodoxy is extreme, but that it is “Protestant” – ie. not pure or “Orthodox” enough. They believe that because we celebrate Christmas on 25th December and not 7th January, and because our Bishops have dialogue with religious leaders of other Christian traditions, that we are heretics. So your attempt to co-opt this man to back up your original slur, probably based on a few seconds of googling, is highly ironic.

            Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s