Character and conduct conditions on Australian visas: 8528, 8564, 8553 explained (2026)

How visa conditions 8528, 8564 and 8553 limit convictions, criminal conduct and security activity, and what a breach means for PR plans.

Published: 10 July 2026 Reading time 12 min

Condition 8564 says one thing: the holder must not engage in criminal conduct. If it is attached to your visa and it is breached, the visa becomes exposed to cancellation under sections 116 to 119 of the Migration Act 1958, and with it the lawful basis for staying in Australia or moving to the next step of a permanent pathway. The wording below comes from the Migration Regulations 1994 Schedule 8 visa conditions text published by the Federal Register of Legislation (F1996B03551), checked as at the September 2026 official compilation.

What do conditions 8528, 8564 and 8553 actually require?

Each condition is a short, standalone obligation listed in Schedule 8 of the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Migration Regulations 1994 Schedule 8 visa conditions pages on the Federal Register of Legislation). Read literally, they divide into three distinct concerns: your conviction record at the border, your conduct while you hold the visa, and your involvement in activities prejudicial to security.

Condition	Core obligation (as drafted)	When it applies
8528	Holder must not have one or more criminal convictions where the sentence or sentences, whether served or not, total 12 months or more	At the time of travel to, and entry into, Australia
8564	Holder must not engage in criminal conduct	Drafted as a continuing restraint while the visa is held
8553	Holder must not become involved in activities prejudicial to security, within the meaning of section 4 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979	Drafted as a continuing restraint while the visa is held
8303	Holder must not become involved in activities disruptive to, or violence threatening harm to, the Australian community or a group within it	Drafted as a continuing restraint while the visa is held
8556	Holder must not communicate or associate with a listed terrorist entity, a prescribed terrorist organisation, or a state sponsor of terrorism	Drafted as a continuing restraint while the visa is held

Two details in the drafting are easy to miss. Condition 8528 aggregates: it is triggered by one or more convictions whose sentences total 12 months or more, and it counts those sentences "whether served or not". Condition 8564 contains no reference to a conviction and no sentence threshold — it is framed entirely around conduct.

How do the three differ — convictions, conduct, and security?

Condition 8528 is a border-time test. It asks a question about your record at the moment you travel to and enter Australia: do you carry convictions whose sentences add up to 12 months or more? Because it is assessed at each travel and entry, leaving and returning does not reset it — a later re-entry is met with the same question.

Condition 8564 is a conduct-based restraint that operates differently. Nothing in its text requires a charge, a conviction, or any particular sentence. That makes the two conditions complementary rather than duplicates: 8528 is about the accumulated sentencing record you bring to the border, while 8564 is about what you do while holding the visa.

Condition 8553 sits on the security side of the line. Its key term, "prejudicial to security", is not defined inside Schedule 8; it takes its meaning from section 4 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979. In practice that means the scope of the condition moves with that definition rather than with ordinary criminal law concepts.

Which visas carry these conditions?

Not automatically. Every one of these conditions carries the same note in Schedule 8: whether a visa of a particular class may be made subject to the condition depends on the relevant provision in Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Schedule 8 is the menu of available conditions; Schedule 2 determines, class by class, which items on that menu can actually be imposed.

So the correct first question for any holder is not "does this condition exist" but whether the Schedule 2 provisions applying to their visa class allow it and whether it was imposed on their grant.

What happens if a condition is breached?

The same note in Schedule 8 routes breaches to the Migration Act 1958 sections 41 and 116 to 119 — section 41 being the provision dealing with visa conditions, and sections 116 to 119 containing the cancellation powers that a breach engages. The consequence contemplated by the drafting is therefore cancellation, not a fine or a warning, and cancellation of a visa ends it.

This is where conditions 8301 and 8302 sit alongside the others. Condition 8301 requires that after entry to Australia the holder must satisfy relevant public interest criteria before the visa ceases; condition 8302 extends the same requirement to all relevant members of the family unit. In other words, meeting public interest criteria is not a one-off event at grant — these conditions make it a continuing obligation that survives entry and runs until the visa ends.

What does all of this mean if you are planning permanent residency?

The risk is asymmetric. Suppose a temporary visa holder — say someone holding a visa they intend to use as the platform for a later permanent application — is alleged to have engaged in criminal conduct while 8564 is attached. The exposure is not merely to some future assessment; it is to the loss of the visa itself now, and a visa that is cancelled cannot be used as the stepping stone it was held for.

Suppose instead that the issue is historical: a conviction record that reaches the 12-month aggregated threshold in 8528. The condition is engaged at travel to and entry into Australia, so the risk concentrates at the border rather than during residence — which means travel plans deserve the same scrutiny as conduct plans.

Everything above explains how the conditions are written and what the legislation itself points to; it is general information, not advice about your circumstances, and anyone facing a live allegation, a cancellation notice, or a proposed travel decision should rely on the official legal text and appropriate professional advice rather than on this article.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does visa condition 8564 actually prohibit?

Condition 8564 states that the holder must not engage in criminal conduct. Its text contains no requirement for a conviction and no sentence threshold, so it is framed around conduct itself rather than around a court record.

Is condition 8564 the same as condition 8528?

No. Condition 8528 applies at travel to and entry into Australia and turns on having convictions whose sentences, served or not, total 12 months or more. Condition 8564 imposes a continuing restraint on engaging in criminal conduct while the visa is held.

Does a suspended sentence count toward condition 8528?

Yes, on the wording of the condition. Condition 8528 expressly refers to sentences "whether served or not", and it aggregates across one or more convictions to reach the 12-month total.

Which visas have condition 8553 or 8564 attached?

That depends on the visa class. Schedule 8 notes that whether a visa of a particular class may be made subject to a condition depends on the relevant provision in Schedule 2 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

What is the consequence of breaching one of these conditions?

Breach engages the cancellation provisions. Schedule 8 refers readers to the Migration Act 1958 sections 41 and 116 to 119, which deal with visa conditions and the cancellation powers that follow from a breach.

How do conditions 8301 and 8302 affect my family?

Condition 8301 requires the holder to satisfy relevant public interest criteria after entry and before the visa ceases. Condition 8302 imposes the same requirement on all relevant members of the family unit, so the obligation is not limited to the primary holder.

What does "prejudicial to security" mean in condition 8553?

Schedule 8 does not define it. The condition imports the meaning of "prejudicial to security" from section 4 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.