Australian Federal Police confirmed on 10 February that a 31-year-old Iranian national will appear before the Perth Magistrates Court after allegedly disabling his electronic-monitoring device on two occasions earlier this month. The man, whose identity has not been released, faces two counts under section 76D(3) of the Migration Act 1958 for failing to comply with visa-mandated electronic surveillance— offences that carry penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment and/or a AU$99,000 fine per breach.
Electronic monitoring is routinely applied to non-citizens assessed as flight-risk or awaiting immigration-status resolution. The AFP alleges the accused removed or rendered inoperable the device on 3 and 4 February, triggering location alerts. He was located and arrested on 9 February after a coordinated search involving state police.
![AFP Charges Iran-Born Man for Tampering with Visa-Monitoring Device in Perth]()
Amid these heightened enforcement measures, organisations and individuals can streamline their visa and compliance processes by leveraging services such as VisaHQ, which provides up-to-date guidance on Australian visa requirements and hands-on application assistance (https://www.visahq.com/australia/). Proactively securing the correct visa class and understanding its conditions help reduce the likelihood of strict compliance measures—such as electronic monitoring—being imposed in the first place.
The case is the first prosecution under amended Migration Act penalties that took effect last year, signalling a stricter approach to compliance. Mobility risk managers should note that any sponsored workers or long-term visitors placed under electronic monitoring—for example, following visa cancellations—now face substantially higher penalties for tampering.
The matter has been adjourned to 16 February. Legal observers expect the court to clarify sentencing benchmarks that will guide future enforcement actions. Employers sponsoring foreign nationals are advised to remind at-risk employees of their obligations, as sponsors can also face sanctions if breaches are linked to inadequate monitoring or support.
Electronic monitoring is routinely applied to non-citizens assessed as flight-risk or awaiting immigration-status resolution. The AFP alleges the accused removed or rendered inoperable the device on 3 and 4 February, triggering location alerts. He was located and arrested on 9 February after a coordinated search involving state police.
Amid these heightened enforcement measures, organisations and individuals can streamline their visa and compliance processes by leveraging services such as VisaHQ, which provides up-to-date guidance on Australian visa requirements and hands-on application assistance (https://www.visahq.com/australia/). Proactively securing the correct visa class and understanding its conditions help reduce the likelihood of strict compliance measures—such as electronic monitoring—being imposed in the first place.
The case is the first prosecution under amended Migration Act penalties that took effect last year, signalling a stricter approach to compliance. Mobility risk managers should note that any sponsored workers or long-term visitors placed under electronic monitoring—for example, following visa cancellations—now face substantially higher penalties for tampering.
The matter has been adjourned to 16 February. Legal observers expect the court to clarify sentencing benchmarks that will guide future enforcement actions. Employers sponsoring foreign nationals are advised to remind at-risk employees of their obligations, as sponsors can also face sanctions if breaches are linked to inadequate monitoring or support.
