Australia is changing how it weighs serious character concerns. Ministerial Direction 123 was signed on 18 September 2026 by Minister Tony Burke, starts on 31 October 2026, and revokes Direction 110, which has applied since June 2024. If you hold a visa, are applying for one, or are supporting someone facing a character issue, here is what the change does and what it does not.
A Ministerial Direction is a binding instruction issued under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958. It does not replace the Act. It tells Department of Home Affairs delegates and the Administrative Review Tribunal which factors they must consider, and how much weight each carries, when making certain character decisions.
Direction 123 applies when a decision-maker is considering:
It is not a new visa. It is a set of rules for character decisions, and it only applies when a visa application or visa is being considered on character grounds.
No. Nobody loses a visa on 31 October simply because the Direction commences. A relevant character decision must already be under way, and the decision-maker must assess the facts of that individual matter. Visa cancellation can also be discretionary, mandatory or by operation of law, and character cancellation is only one part of that wider framework.
| Issue | Direction 110 | Direction 123 (from 31 Oct 2026) |
|---|---|---|
| Ties to Australia | Primary consideration | Other consideration, so generally less weight |
| Family violence | Narrower treatment | Broader definition, including coercive control |
| Future-risk wording | “Would” engage in conduct | Guidance reflects the lower “might” threshold in the Act |
| Australian business interests | Listed “other consideration” | No longer a separate listed consideration |
| Sentence imposed | Carve-outs limited its use | Carve-outs removed, so relevant across offence types |
Direction 123 sets four primary considerations, which generally carry more weight than “other considerations”:
Direction 123 moves ties to Australia back to a secondary consideration. Long residence, Australian family relationships and community connections must still be considered where relevant. However, they will generally weigh less against community protection, family violence, community expectations and children’s interests.
For someone who arrived as a child or has lived here for decades, this may be the most significant practical change. Submissions prepared under Direction 110 may need to be rewritten.
The new framework covers a wider range of conduct, including behaviour that is threatening, coercive, controlling or dominating, as well as physical, sexual, emotional, psychological and economic abuse. Commentary on the Direction points to examples such as:
The relationships covered are also broader and can include caregiving and certain cultural family relationships. Conduct that may not have counted as family violence under the old Direction could now be highly relevant.
These two points are widely misreported, so the distinction matters.
The shift from “would” to “might” in paragraph 501(6)(d) came from the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Act 2026, not from Direction 123. The same Act introduced new character-test grounds covering matters such as links to prohibited hate groups, hate crime conduct and certain hateful public statements, including online statements made in Australia or overseas. The ground itself became law in January 2026, and Direction 123 tells decision-makers how to apply it.
“Might” is a lower future-risk threshold than “would”, but it does not make speculation enough. The decision-maker must still apply the statutory test to the evidence in your case. The practical lesson for visa holders is that online conduct can carry migration consequences where it falls within the legislation.
If the Department or the ART considers your matter on or after 31 October 2026, expect Direction 123 to apply even if the matter started earlier. Direction 110 continues to govern decisions made before that date. If your matter is close to the commencement date, the timing of the decision can change which framework applies, so confirm the transitional position for your case.
Home Affairs generally notifies a person in Australia and gives them a chance to respond before a discretionary cancellation. If you receive a Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation (NOICC), a refusal notice or any section 501 correspondence:
Sometimes. The decision notice should say whether review rights exist. Some decisions can go to the Administrative Review Tribunal, decisions made personally by the Minister generally cannot be merits-reviewed by the ART, and judicial review may be available where there is a legal error. Strict deadlines apply, so check your notice straight away.
What is Ministerial Direction 123?
It is the instrument that guides decision-makers on refusing or cancelling visas on character grounds, and on revoking mandatory cancellations. It commences on 31 October 2026 and replaces Direction 110.
Will Direction 123 cancel my visa?
No. It only applies where a character decision is already being considered under section 501 or 501CA.
Do my family ties in Australia still count?
Yes, but as an “other consideration”, so they generally carry less weight than before.
Can social media posts affect my visa?
Possibly. The January 2026 amendments contemplate certain public statements, including online ones, where they fall within the new character-test provisions.
What is a NOICC?
A Notice of Intention to Consider Cancellation is the Department’s formal notice that it is considering cancelling your visa. It gives you an opportunity to respond.
Character matters can affect your right to remain in Australia, detention and removal, and future visa options. If you have received a character notice, cancellation notice or refusal, speak to a registered migration agent promptly.
Book a consultation at provisa.setmore.com or call 02 9007 4409.
Migration is a process, not a problem. Let us take you through the process.
General information only, not legal advice. Character decisions are highly fact-specific, and review rights and deadlines depend on the individual decision.