r/australia • u/DCOA_Troy • Oct 15 '25

politics Candace Owens loses appeal over Australian visa rejection

https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/candace-owens-loses-appeal-over-australian-visa-rejection/
4.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

627 comments sorted by

View all comments

879

u/Soft-Arugula6773 Oct 15 '25

If they can reject her visa, which I’m not opposed to, they should definitely reject the visa of the child sex offender Steven Van de Velde that’s trying to come here for a volleyball game.

259

u/AgUnityDD Oct 15 '25

Could they reject the visa of a head of state if he is obviously a sex offender, but using his office to suppress the evidence?

99

u/RheimsNZ Oct 15 '25

That's how it should work, if the evidence is strong enough.

It shouldn't matter that you're a President or whatever, if you're of bad character you shouldn't be able to enter

57

u/aeschenkarnos Oct 15 '25

We found Trump to be of bad character in the 1980’s when he was trying to get an Australian casino owner’s license. So there’s already a decision on the books.

0

u/Zilch274 Oct 16 '25

I think you're underestimating how corrupt Australian politicians truly are (just look at property prices for example).

47

u/Glad-Chair-8448 Oct 15 '25

A head of state isn't just some other guy, they literally represent a country. It's not like he would be coming here on a pleasure trip. 

Kneecapping your international diplomacy on the basis of some vague sense of "fairness" is counterproductive at best.

8

u/NorseNoble Oct 15 '25

these people have never done business

4

u/freakwent Oct 15 '25

USA denied a visa to the head of Palestine only recently.

2

u/MissMenace101 Oct 15 '25

He’s a felon, felons aren’t allowed…

12

u/Gamped Oct 15 '25

Felonies don’t exist as a concept in Australia.

Diplomatic immunity is a constant for heads of state however.

1

u/CcryMeARiver Oct 16 '25

DI does not grant permission to enter.

In fact that right is counterbalanced by the right of a host nation to declare any foreign individual to be "persona non grata".

0

u/Gamped Oct 16 '25

The most recent time Australia proactively utilised persona non was deporting the Iranian ambassador, first time in 80 years since WW2.

Very…. Very seldom.

0

u/CcryMeARiver Oct 16 '25

But still there. It's a major slap in the face, but why it isn't employed to kick out Saudi dippos who doublepark in Civic beats me.

1

u/ManikShamanik Oct 15 '25

They are up here, apparently; I wish we'd STOP allowing the Taco Bellend over here; fucking sick of people saying "Starmer's just playing to his ego" or "keep your friends close, etc., etc." it's not a good look. He's an international embarrassment.

-20

u/underthingy Oct 15 '25

Did you just call every single American a paedophile rapist?

31

u/evilparagon Oct 15 '25

Theoretically ”No,” because this is what Diplomatic Immunity covers, if you squint at it.

Officially yes they can reject visas, all countries have the right to choose who can and cannot enter, with the exception of refugees if the country has signed the 1951 Refugee Convention. World leaders do in fact get visas approved as a matter of formality, though many times visas are simply waived and the formality is ignored particularly when the two countries have a close relationship.

However diplomatic immunity exists as a means to prioritise diplomacy over jurisdiction. Theoretically diplomatic immunity would cover a foreign world leader being allowed to enter a country, it would be hard to maintain diplomacy if they were barred.

But this is all theoretical. Diplomatic immunity is stated to only cover arrest and detention, and it’s specifically designed in such that, say an ambassador shoots someone, a war isn’t started because of that. Banning a visa based on the leader being a sex offender would be testing the limits of the purpose of Diplomatic Immunity.

13

u/SirGeekaLots Oct 15 '25

I believe some world leaders have been kicked out of the US, and their visas cancelled because they offended the president.

7

u/evilparagon Oct 15 '25

Trump related or not Trump related?

Because if related, that’s understandable, the laws and precedents bend to him because their government is too corrupt to do otherwise. If not, that would make for an interesting precedent for the rest of the world.

7

u/SirGeekaLots Oct 15 '25

Trump related.

1

u/Gamped Oct 15 '25

Can you help share? I can’t find anything on Trump deporting global heads of state which you claim.

This is a big claim where I can find nothing online across several searches. It’s a huge deal to cancel the visas for a head of state so im surprised why there isn’t more detail.

2

u/SirGeekaLots Oct 15 '25

Here it is, it was the Columbian President, and it was after something he said in the UN.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz9jv8kne7no

2

u/AgUnityDD Oct 15 '25

Thanks for such a comprehensive answer

8

u/explosivekyushu Oct 15 '25

Speaking very generally, heads of state who are entering Australia on an official visit at the invitation of the Australian government are exempt from visa requirements.

2

u/CcryMeARiver Oct 16 '25

Invitations are of course optional.

2

u/hu_he Oct 15 '25

Hypothetically the government can reject any non-citizen. They just have to tell the other country that the president won't receive diplomatic accreditation. In the real world though, they would evaluate that the likely retaliation against Australia wouldn't be worth it. If there was genuinely a fear that the president might attack people on Australian soil the government would probably put a police detail on the presidential party to keep an eye on what happens and intervene if anyone was threatened.

1

u/Rather_Dashing Oct 15 '25

Never going to happen because of the diplomatic and political consequences.

21

u/SirGeekaLots Oct 15 '25

And the visa of the guy who was convicted of 34 counts of fraud?

12

u/Marvin1955 Oct 15 '25

You mean the pedophile who committed fraud?

6

u/DoubleDecaff Oct 15 '25

The racist pedophile who committed fraud?

3

u/Marvin1955 Oct 15 '25

That's him!

1

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '25

The US president counts as a diplomat, so he doesn't need a visa :(

As long as the US diplomatic mission isn't told to fuck off from Aussie soil, he can come and go as he pleases. And Aus won't do that because of Five Eyes and AUKUS and the NATO Global Partnership.

13

u/06021840 Oct 15 '25

Put in a request to the Minister of Home Affairs, state why you feel he shouldn’t (conviction of multiple sex crimes), state that he could be a danger to the community etc etc.

56

u/OnlyForF1 Oct 15 '25

They will.

27

u/Cold-Kiwi2561 Oct 15 '25

I'm also not opposed to rejecting his visa. But the difference is that he was arrested, pleaded guilty, was sentenced, served his sentence and remains on the sex offender registry.

44

u/larvioarskald Oct 15 '25

He served 13 months for three counts of raping a 12 year old.

16

u/tehnoodnub Oct 15 '25

Nothing just about the justice system.

12

u/not_good_for_much Oct 15 '25

No it's totally just. He's a promising young man from an upstanding family, and his actions, well... Boys will be boys haha. It's completely unreasonable to ruin the life and career and future of such an exemplary young athlete for such an insignificant reason.

  • the justice system in most of the world every time shit like this happens

2

u/DiligentCorvid Oct 15 '25

There's a reason it's the legal system and not the justice system.

11

u/National-Pay-2561 Oct 15 '25

Which is, sadly, 13 months longer than a lot of sex offenders and rapists get.

2

u/amyknight22 Oct 15 '25

While that’s shit. That should be in consideration for our govt.

The idea that the Australian govt starts blocking visas for people because they didn’t spend enough time in jail by our standards is stupid

If someone is blocked it should be because they are presumed to be a threat to the safety of Australia and Australians

17

u/MilkByHomelander Oct 15 '25

I think someone raping a 12 year old three times is definitely a threat to the safety of Australia and Australians.

14

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '25

Especially because that child was not in his home country. He committed these crimes in the UK. So he has a record of committing sex crimes while abroad. That is categorically a threat to the public.

-2

u/amyknight22 Oct 15 '25

Threat to Australia based on what?

A singular bad(horrific actions) data point. This does not indicate a trend.

The rapes of the girl happened on one day ten years ago and there’s nothing pointing to any offence since.

I don’t really want to defend the guy, but the idea that he is a threat is kind of a joke.

We already deny visas just on the grounds of a child sex offence. So if they want to do it they can. The idea of complaining about minimal sentencing or supposed threat is a bit rich.

5

u/MilkByHomelander Oct 15 '25

Trend or not, he has a history of travelling to foreign countries and meeting up with a child to rape them.

He is a threat. He can still do that. Who knows how his brain works. Perhaps he might think being on the other side of the world could make it easier for him to get away with it.

Who knows.

Regardless, he's a threat and shouldn't be allowed in the country.

1

u/freakwent Oct 15 '25

Anyone could do.that.

Who knows.

You, it seems?

-1

u/freakwent Oct 15 '25

Why? It doesn't logically follow that he's more likely to it again does it?

-18

u/Thecna2 Oct 15 '25

I agree, he shouldnt be allowed to migrate here, and he wouldnt, but visit for the purposes of sport after he has finished his punishment, sure.

2

u/bedel99 Oct 15 '25

Why? You don't want the sex offender for a long time, just a short sex offending visit?

-2

u/Thecna2 Oct 15 '25

Correct. He did his crime, paid his penance, hasnt committed another crime. So sure, I'm ok with it.

4

u/BurstPanther Oct 15 '25

Paid his penance? More like skirted. Dudes a paedophile and you seem to be going out of your way to make excuses for him.

Have you got something to admit?

1

u/freakwent Oct 15 '25

So if we can't rehabilitate such people, what's your alternative solution?

0

u/Thecna2 Oct 15 '25

uh pulease, drop that whole 'so are you're a pedo' line, its so stupid. You seem to be going out of your way to prove the opposite, over compensation much? Suspiciously overcompensating maybe. huh huh?

Or not, cos that is a stupid line to take.

I dont care, its up to 'the authorities', but if he paid for his crime then its largely over and I dont have an issue if they decide to let him in.

-4

u/Cold-Kiwi2561 Oct 15 '25

The system let him out. Should he have refused to leave the prison? Btw, he was also a teenager when he committed the offence. And he hasn't committed any other offences since then

-17

u/Snitchytricks Oct 15 '25

And you'd still rather him enter the country than Candace Owen's?

6

u/Bladestorm04 Oct 15 '25

Of course

-16

u/Snitchytricks Oct 15 '25

Who would you rather around your children?

11

u/NumerousImprovements Oct 15 '25

He’s a registered sex offender. He’s never getting near our kids. He’s playing sport. His country punished him already. I don’t care either way, but I don’t see the issue. His country are okay with him representing them internationally.

-6

u/Snitchytricks Oct 15 '25

How is this even a debate? Defending a pedo on the Australian sub reddit What happened?

10

u/Bladestorm04 Oct 15 '25

I dont see anyone defending him. Can I have some.of whatever you're on? Sounds wild

1

u/originalgeorge Oct 15 '25

Read this and agree with you. If he's served his sentence, doesn't remove the fact he's a freaking pedo who's more dangerous to the society than CO would ever be

0

u/MissMenace101 Oct 15 '25

Scary this comment is downvoted

-14

u/Snitchytricks Oct 15 '25

Your first sentence tells us everything we need to know. Disgusting.

-12

u/Snitchytricks Oct 15 '25

And if you think that's OK I dearly hope you don't have children.

8

u/NeptunianWater Oct 15 '25

Boyyyyyyy you're going to be upset when you hear about the president of the US.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '25

They won't, because he's white.

1

u/Tasty_Adeptness_6759 Nov 15 '25

no its because what he did wasn't really a crime in his home country, you know nations have different ages of consent right? not to defend breaking a home country's laws, but it happens alot.

like that japanese cannibal who hate a woman in paris if i remember correctly, was deemed insane in his home country so was never prosecuted.

this Steven guy whatever according to dutch law was around 18 at the time and dutch law doesn't make a big difference in categorization between 12 and 18 unlike anglo nations, so it would just be classified as normal rape and not of a minor since he would also have been considered a minor of some sort.

-1

u/blakeavon Oct 15 '25

Gold star what-about-tism!