What a Subclass 202 proposer must lodge at the proposal stage in 2026

A proposer does not apply for the Global Special Humanitarian visa (Subclass 202) — the applicant does. What the proposer lodges is the proposal itself, backed by proof of who they are, proof of the relationship they rely on, and the applicant's details. According to the Australian Government Department of Home Affairs page "Global Special Humanitarian visa (Subclass 202)", current as of August 2026, proposers are directed to the "For Proposers" section of that page for the department's own proposing instructions. This article is general information about that step; it is not advice on any individual case, and anyone preparing a real proposal should check it against the department's current published requirements and, where needed, professional advice.

What does the proposal have to establish?

The proposal is a short document in form but a demanding one in substance. It has to carry four things at once: that the proposer is allowed to propose, that the relationship they rely on is the one the criteria recognise, that the applicant's circumstances fall inside the visa's terms, and that no family member has been left out.

What the proposal must establish	What that means in practice
The proposer's status	Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident, eligible New Zealand citizen, or an organisation in Australia
The relationship relied on	The applicant is being proposed on that relationship, and the relationship existed and was declared at the point the criteria require
The applicant's situation	Living outside Australia and outside their country of origin, and subject to substantial discrimination amounting to a gross violation of human rights there
The immediate-family pathway	Where the applicant applies as an immediate family member, the proposer must be the person granted the visa, and the application must be made within five years of that grant
Family members	All family members must be declared, including those who are not applying

The Migration Regulations 1994 set out the two proposal routes. Where no approved proposing organisation is involved, clause 202.225 requires a proposal by a qualified person or organisation; the regulation text associates this with the department's proposal form (Form 681). Because the department's current form and document list are what a case officer actually checks against, treat any regulation-derived checklist as needing confirmation against the Home Affairs page before lodging.

Who can be the proposer, and does the pathway change that?

The official page gives four possibilities: an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident, an eligible New Zealand citizen, or an organisation in Australia. Nothing in the criteria requires the proposer to be a relative at all — a friend or a community organisation can propose — but the pathway does narrow the field in one case. If the applicant is applying as an immediate family member of a person who was granted this visa, the proposer must be that person.

Under clause 202.211(2) of the Migration Regulations 1994, that family pathway also carries timing conditions: the applicant was a member of the proposer's immediate family when the proposer's visa was granted, the relationship was disclosed to the department before that grant, and the applicant's application is made within five years of it.

Which documents most often sink a proposal?

The criteria themselves point to a recurring set of failure points. These are the places where the wording of the Migration Regulations 1994 and the official visa page leave least room, rather than published departmental statistics.

The applicant is still in their country of origin, or is in Australia, when the criteria require them to be outside both.
The discrimination described does not reach the threshold of a gross violation of human rights, as opposed to general disadvantage or economic hardship.
The relationship was never declared to the department before the proposer's own visa was granted, or the applicant was not immediate family at that point.
The five-year window in clause 202.211(2) has already closed.
Family members were omitted from the application. The official page warns that a family member who is not declared may not be able to be proposed for a humanitarian visa later.
The proposal stops being true — for the organisation route, clause 202.212 requires the organisation to remain compliant and the applicant to remain proposed by it.
The proposer is barred: a person who arrived in Australia as an unauthorised maritime arrival on or after 13 August 2012 cannot propose family members under the Humanitarian Program, in line with the Migration Regulations 1994.

Form-filling errors deserve separate mention. The department lists three things that lengthen processing: an incorrectly completed form, missing documents or information, and time taken to verify what was provided.

What does lodging a proposal commit the proposer to?

Money and settlement, mostly. Travel to Australia is the applicant's or the proposer's responsibility — the official page states this twice, once for the general case and once with the note that the proposer is responsible for arranging travel. Toll Remote Logistics Pty Ltd (Toll) is the department's Assisted Passage service provider and helps with booking flights, exit permits and issuing the Australian Migration Status (AMS) ImmiCard, an ICAO-compliant travel document that also works as proof of visa details and eligibility for government services in Australia. The International Organization for Migration can also assist with travel under its own arrangements.

The proposer or applicant is expected to tell the department about travel bookings. That notification is what triggers the invitation to the Australian Cultural Orientation (AUSCO) program before travel and settlement assistance on arrival. The page also states plainly that proposers have other responsibilities to help the person settle.

Two money points are worth keeping straight. There is no visa application charge for this visa unless the applicant is proposed under the Community Support Program by an Approved Proposing Organisation. And an assurance of support is not listed among the standard requirements on the visa page; the Migration Regulations 1994 (clause 202.227A) provide that one may be required if the Minister asks for it.

Does who proposes affect the outcome?

Yes, through the priority groups used in the Special Humanitarian Program. The department processes applications in order of priority, and states that family reunion applications are more likely to succeed where the proposer is an immediate or close family member.

Priority group	Proposer
1	Immediate family member (partner or dependent child; or the proposer's parent where the proposer is under 18) who was granted a Class XB visa, or is an Australian citizen who held a Protection or Resolution of Status visa — and the applicant meets the split-family criteria
2	Close family member — partner, child, parent or sibling — who does not hold a Protection or Resolution of Status visa, where the split-family criteria are not met
3	Extended family member — grandparent, grandchild, cousin, aunt, uncle, niece or nephew — who does not hold a Protection or Resolution of Status visa
4	Distant relative, friend or community organisation that does not hold a Protection or Resolution of Status visa
5	Proposer who holds a Protection or Resolution of Status visa

The department is explicit that it cannot expedite applications outside these priorities, because all humanitarian applicants are in similarly compelling circumstances.

How long does the proposal lead to a decision?

Long, and often to no visa at all. The official page says the department receives more applications for resettlement each year than there are places available, so the decision process may take many years and most applications will be unsuccessful. It also says the department does not give processing updates, and that it will contact applicants when a case reaches the next stage or is finalised. The Migration Regulations 1994 add a hard structural limit in clause 202.226: grants cannot exceed the number of Subclass 202 visas available for that financial year.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the proposer have to be in Australia to lodge?

The criteria describe the proposer as a person or organisation in Australia. The applicant's position is separate and stricter: they must be living outside Australia and outside their country of origin when they apply.

Can a proposer add family members to the proposal later?

Certain family members can be added at any time before the department decides the application. The safer course is to declare everyone from the start, because a family member left undeclared may not be proposable for a humanitarian visa after the applicant arrives in Australia.

Who pays for the flights?

The applicant or the proposer. Toll, as the department's Assisted Passage provider, can help organise travel and issue the AMS ImmiCard, and the International Organization for Migration offers its own travel assistance, but neither removes the responsibility to pay.

Is an assurance of support required for Subclass 202?

Not as a standard requirement — the official visa page does not list one. Clause 202.227A of the Migration Regulations 1994 gives the Minister the option of requiring one, so a proposal should be prepared for the possibility rather than assume it away.

Does the proposer have to be a close relative?

No. Any Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident, eligible New Zealand citizen or Australian organisation can propose. Being an immediate or close family member changes the priority group, and the department says family reunion cases are more likely to succeed when the proposer is in that position.

What happens if travel bookings are not reported?

The department uses that information to send the AUSCO invitation before travel and to arrange settlement assistance on arrival, so withholding it mainly costs the applicant those services.