Abstract: In November 2025, as the full effects of the High Court's ASF17 judgment manifest, Australia's immigration detention system faces a new wave of tightening. The latest data from the Department of Home Affairs reveals a record high in the number of non-citizens re-detained for 'refusing to cooperate with removal arrangements.' This article provides an in-depth analysis of how the government is utilizing the 'Removal and Other Measures' amendment to enforce mandatory compliance on non-citizens remaining in Australia and the profound impact on the state of immigration detention.
November 21, 2025 — If the NZYQ judgment in late 2023 offered a fleeting glimmer of "freedom" to hundreds of long-term detainees, then today, in 2025, the legal pendulum has swung violently back towards strict enforcement.
This week, the latest quarterly immigration detention report submitted to Parliament by the Department of Home Affairs sent shockwaves through the legal community. The report indicates a surge in the number of Bridging Visa R (BVR) holders being returned to Immigration Detention Centres (IDCs) over the past two quarters. The core driver of this trend is the government's "systematic weaponisation" of the principles established in the High Court's 2024 ASF17 judgment, combined with the full implementation of the Migration Amendment (Removal and Other Measures) Act.
For non-citizens whose visas have been cancelled and who have no protection obligations but remain in the Australian community, "non-cooperation with removal" is no longer a strategy for indefinite delay—it is a one-way ticket back to a detention centre.
To understand the current grim situation, one must review and grasp the legal foundation established by the ASF17 case.
In the NZYQ case, the High Court ruled that indefinite detention is unlawful if there is no "real prospect of removal." However, in the subsequent ASF17 case, the High Court clarified a critical distinction: if removal cannot be effected because the detainee refuses to cooperate (e.g., refusing to sign travel documents or attend embassy interviews), then continued detention remains lawful.
By late 2025, the Department of Home Affairs has applied this principle to its fullest extent. The Immigix Legal Team has observed the following new enforcement norms:
Immigration officials are now frequently summoning BVR holders for "removal interviews." During these interviews, officers directly instruct individuals to sign passport applications or consent forms for return. Under current laws, refusing to sign these documents not only constitutes a criminal offence (punishable by mandatory minimum sentences) but also directly constitutes "non-cooperation" as defined in ASF17, thereby granting the Department the power to immediately re-detain the individual.
Previously, many non-citizens from countries like Iran or Sudan refused to cooperate in obtaining passports citing a "fear of persecution." However, with the Australian government signing resettlement agreements with multiple third countries and adopting a strict interpretation of protection obligations, mere "claims of fear" are no longer sufficient to halt detention orders for those who have already received final negative Protection Findings.
Another major shift in 2025 immigration detention policy is that the government is no longer fixated on returning non-citizens solely to their country of origin.
Facing stalemates where certain countries (such as Iran) refuse to accept involuntary returnees, the Australian government has intensified efforts to remove non-citizens to willing third countries. This creates a legally complex scenario:
Recent Federal Court precedents indicate a tendency to support the government's position: as long as removal is "reasonably practicable," regardless of the destination, the individual has an obligation to cooperate.
As the number of "returnees" to detention increases, Immigration Detention Centres across Australia (such as Villawood and Melbourne IDC) are once again facing overcrowding pressures. To manage this, the government has implemented a stricter tiered management system:
For those currently living in the community on a Bridging Visa R (BVR), Immigix issues a severe legal warning: Remaining "silent" is no longer safe.
Many mistakenly believe that as long as they report on time and do not re-offend, they will be left alone. However, under the new enforcement model, "inaction" itself is a risk. If you do not actively demonstrate that you are taking steps to arrange your departure, or if you fail to continuously provide "objective evidence" (rather than subjective will) of barriers to removal, Australian Border Force (ABF) compliance officers may knock on your door at any moment.
It is particularly noteworthy that prosecution rates for Breach of Visa Conditions have doubled in 2025. For instance, breaching a curfew by even a few minutes or forgetting to charge a monitoring device can be viewed not just as a breach, but as evidence of "disrespect for Australian law and heightened risk," triggering re-detention.
Facing the high-pressure environment brought about by the ASF17 precedent, mere avoidance will only accelerate the process of detention. While feasible legal pathways are narrow, they still exist:
The Australian immigration detention regime of 2025 is revealing its cold and precise nature. The scales of justice no longer tolerate any form of "system loophole exploitation." For non-citizens caught in this system, understanding the brutality of the rules and seeking the most professional legal protection is the only leverage available in this high-stakes game between freedom and confinement.
The Immigix team continues to closely monitor every legal development, dedicated to finding legal survival space for our clients even in the most desperate circumstances.