An alcoholic schizophrenic South Sudanese refugee just won an Australian visa appeal to remain in Australia and obtain access to the NDIS welfare system - despite a previous criminal conviction for viciously bashing a triple amputee with the triple amputee’s own crutches. The South Sudanese man held down the amputee’s one remaining limb so that he could viciously beat them with no defensive action for at least five minutes, delivering 77 blows to the victim’s skull with their own crutches. Australian courts ruled that he could not be deported back to South Sudan at the conclusion of his 24 month prison sentence due to risks to his own safety in South Sudan. So he was held in indefinite legal detention before being released as a result of the now infamous NZYQ High Court decision. In immigration detention he violently assaulted a female Australian guard by grabbing her by the neck and tried to head butt staff. But he was ultimately released as part of the NZYQ wave of releases. The NZYQ High Court decision held that foreign convicted murderers, rapists and child rapists could not be kept in Australian indefinite immigration detention if there was no realistic prospect of deporting them to their home countries due to risks to their safety. Hundreds of predators were released onto Australian streets as a result of this decision, with some immediately reoffending in shocking violent attacks. Since his release, the South Sudanese man has been interviewed by police in relation to an alleged sexual assault and an alleged case of theft. Given the inability to send him back to South Sudan, the man - who can only be named as GNHW - had been in the community on a Bridging Visa R, the visa class created for those who had been freed from indefinite immigration detention following NZYQ. GNHW and his legal team successfully argued that the tribunal had failed to properly consider how replacing that bridging visa with a protection visa could reduce the risk he posed to the community. They noted that the protection visa would also open him up to government funding for university studies and potentially support under the NDIS – neither of which was available under Bridging Visa R, which limits him to Medicare and Centrelink support. “Whilst on a temporary visa, we submit that the feelings of social stigma, ostracisation, and possible perceptions (either self or from others) as a ‘second-class citizen’ are liable to negatively impact upon his mental health. Whereas having a permanent visa and being able to participate fully and freely in Australian life and access all services will lead to a reduction in stress, trauma and uncertainty in relation to his visa status and potential deportation and will improve his chances of rehabilitation,” GNHW’s lawyers submitted. “As a holder of a protection visa, he would be eligible for government loans and therefore have the option of returning to university studies. Opportunities to find fulfilling employment would also significantly increase if on a permanent visa.” The Federal Court this week agreed with GNHW’s position, finding the previous tribunal decision had failed to properly consider whether upgrading the man’s visa would reduce what the tribunal found was a “moderate likelihood” he would reoffend. No words to describe this outstanding legal decision.