Al Shimmery and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral by Mr Al Shimmery, who was found by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs to not be of good character, as required by paragraph 21(2)(h) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth). The dispute arose from the delegate's decision to refuse the application based on the applicant's criminal history, specifically an offence of affray and several minor traffic infringements. The case was heard by Emeritus Professor P A Fairall, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Al Shimmery satisfied the "good character" requirement for citizenship by conferral, notwithstanding his conviction for affray and a history of minor traffic offences. The Tribunal was required to assess the weight and significance of these offences in light of the applicant's personal circumstances, remorse, and character references.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's involvement in the affray, finding that while he was not the instigator and acted defensively to assist friends, his conduct did extend beyond mere presence and involved physical action. However, the Tribunal also noted the applicant's remorse, his stated lesson learned from the incident, and that intervening to assist someone facing group violence is not inherently inconsistent with good character, depending on the circumstances. The Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's difficult personal history, including statelessness, health issues, and the death of his brother, and gave weight to character references from medical practitioners and a religious charity, all of whom described him as being of good character. The Tribunal found that the delegate had given considerable weight to the recent criminal history, which outweighed the applicant's positive qualities, and that there was no impediment to a future application demonstrating a longer period of good behaviour. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and remitted the matter for reconsideration.