09-07-2025
Grindr sex pest with ‘fear of persecution in Lebanon' should be granted protection visa, tribunal rules
WARNING: Graphic content
A convicted child sex pest from Lebanon who was caught in a vigilante sting attempting to meet a 15-year-old boy on Grindr should be allowed to stay in the country due to his 'low risk of reoffending' and 'contribution to the Australian community', a tribunal has ruled.
The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) on Friday set aside a decision by the Department of Home Affairs to refuse a permanent protection visa to the 37-year-old on character grounds.
'The visa was cancelled by the department, reinstated by the ART, and a file is now on its way to the Assistant Minister to consider cancellation again,' Immigration Minister Tony Burke said in a statement to
The IT worker, referred to only as DJHT, first arrived in Australia as a skilled migrant at the age of 28 and was later granted a resident return visa, which was subsequently cancelled in July 2024.
He was placed in immigration detention but applied for a permanent protection visa last September.
In February, another delegate of the Minister found DJHT was owed protection obligations as he had a 'well founded fear of persecution' in Lebanon due to his sexual orientation.
He was released on a bridging visa under strict daily reporting requirements.
The man, a Shia Muslim who identifies as bisexual, said in a statement supporting his protection visa application that he has a 'strong attraction to men' and has an 'attraction to teenage boys', which he knows is wrong.
In October 2020, he was caught in an amateur 'predator catcher' style sting, when an unidentified man created a fake Grindr profile using the name 'Jacob' and began exchanging messages with DJHT.
The man claimed he was a virgin, that he was 'only 15' and that he had 'never done anything with people before'.
DJHT then sent several sexually explicit messages to 'Jacob' and tried to arrange a meeting with him.
'You haven't hot [sic] a suck before?' he wrote in one message, court documents state. 'Did someone suck you off before?'
When 'Jacob' responded 'nah never', he wrote, 'Then I'll be the first … I'm cheeky so I will be grabbing it and sucking it for you. You can f**k me as well that's for being a friend.'
DJHT wrote that 'I'll help you and you will enjoy it to the maximum' and pressed 'Jacob' for a meeting, repeatedly commenting 'show me your c**k'.
The man behind the 'Jacob' account arranged a meeting at a park near DJHT's home, where he confronted him and recorded him on video before handing the information to police.
DJHT was arrested and released on bail.
In 2022, he pleaded guilty to using a carriage service to transmit a communication to a person he believed to be under 16 with the intention of procuring that person to engage in sexual activity.
He was handed a 27-month suspended sentence and placed on a two-year good behaviour bond. He complied with his reporting obligations to Sutherland Community Corrections and will remain on the child sex offender registry until 2030.
In sentencing remarks, the court noted DJHT had no prior criminal history and that the offending 'was in the lower range', being 'opportunistic' and 'unsophisticated' and involving a 'fictitious victim' at the top of the age range.
DJHT's application for a permanent protection visa was denied by the Minister in April. He sought a review of the decision later that month and the matter was heard by the ART in June.
The government had rejected DJHT's position that there was a remote or very low risk that he would reoffend, arguing he lacked insight into his offending and had not undergone sufficient rehabilitation.
In her decision, ART senior member Kim Rosser said she was 'of the view that the risk that the applicant will reoffend is low … even in stressful circumstances'.
'I accept that the applicant is genuinely remorseful and that he is ashamed of his behaviour,' she said.
'I do not consider that the fact that the applicant is seeking a visa which would allow him to remain in Australia indefinitely increases the risk of him reoffending.'
She accepted evidence provided by DJHT's psychologist that 'shame was the strongest factor that would deter reoffending', as he 'comes from a conservative Middle Eastern culture, which would make such an act even more shameful'.
Ms Rosser found a number of factors weighed against granting DJHT a protection visa, including both the 'protection' and 'expectations' of the Australian community.
But she gave strong weight to factors in his favour, including the potential legal consequences for DJHT — most seriously the possibility of deportation from Australia to a safe third country such as Nauru.
'In my view, being indefinitely subject to BVR [bridging visa] conditions with the possibility of being removed from Australia at some unspecified time in the future are significant legal consequences of the decision,' she said.
'Overall, whether the applicant is removed to a third country at some time in the future or remains in Australia as the holder of a BVR, I consider that the legal consequences consideration weighs strongly in favour of granting the protection visa.'
She also noted his recent charity and volunteer work, including 'beach litter cleaning efforts and, on occasion, setting up sound systems and cameras for community events'.
Prior to committing the offence, DJHT had worked for an IT company and required a security clearance, which he lost as a result of the charges.
He currently works for another IT company full-time as a senior systems engineer and runs a small consultancy, doing some pro bono work.
'The applicant came to Australia as a skilled migrant and continues to work in the area of his expertise, which represents a contribution to the Australian community, as do the applicant's pro bono and volunteer activities,' Ms Rosser said.
'I conclude that the considerations that weigh in favour of the applicant outweigh the primary considerations of the protection and the expectations of the Australian community.'
Ms Rosser found that 'a decision that would result in the applicant remaining in Australia on a bridging visa potentially for the rest of his life — or possibly being removed from Australia in the future — is not an appropriate exercise of [the Minister's] discretion, particularly given the applicant's ties to the community and the contribution he makes to the community through his skilled employment and other activities'.
The ART, established last year to replace the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), examines rulings under around 400 Commonwealth laws, including immigration and citizenship, social security payments, child support, the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and taxation.
In cases where the ART overturns a visa cancellation or refusal, the Immigration Minister or Assistant Minister can intervene and uphold the original decision.
Were that to happen, the applicant could then seek judicial review from the federal court.
