Darwishi and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by Mr Darwishi, who claimed to have been born in Afghanistan in 1992. The dispute before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was whether the Tribunal could be satisfied of Mr Darwishi's identity for the purposes of section 24(3) of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth). The Tribunal was required to determine if the evidence presented established Mr Darwishi's identity to the requisite standard.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were the meaning of being "satisfied" of an applicant's identity under section 24(3) of the Act, and the meaning of "identity" in this context. The Tribunal also considered whether it was bound by the respondent's policy statements and procedural instructions, and the standard of proof required for establishing identity. The Tribunal had to weigh the totality of the facts presented, including oral evidence and documentary evidence such as an ostensibly genuine "taskera" which was accepted to be inaccurate in at least one respect.

The Tribunal, applying principles from *Minister of Immigration and Border Protection v Makasa* [2021] HCA 1, held that being "satisfied" required an "actual persuasion" of the applicant's identity. The Tribunal affirmed its previous reasoning in *KXDZ and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migration Services and Multicultural Affairs* [2022] AATA 175, stating that it was not bound by the respondent's policy documents as it was exercising a statutory standard rather than a broad discretionary power. After weighing all the evidence, the Tribunal concluded that it was not satisfied of Mr Darwishi's identity to the degree required by section 24(3) of the Act.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning Mr Darwishi's application for citizenship was refused.