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

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the application for citizenship by conferral made by GDHF, a citizen of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. The delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs had refused GDHF's application, being unsatisfied of her identity. GDHF sought review of this decision before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether GDHF had established her identity to the satisfaction of the Minister, as required for citizenship by conferral. This involved assessing the "three pillars of identity" as outlined in citizenship policy instructions: biometrics, documents, and life story. The Tribunal was required to determine if the evidence presented, particularly concerning GDHF's overseas documentation and life story, was sufficient to satisfy the Minister of her identity, despite perceived lacunae.

The Tribunal, applying the principles from *BQG21 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs* [2023] FCA 865, noted that the concept of identity concerns whether the applicant is the person they claim to be with the relevant background. While acknowledging gaps in GDHF's documentation prior to her arrival in Australia, the Tribunal found that the documentary evidence, including a Titre de Voyage and a UNHCR Household Registration Document, supported her account. The Tribunal also considered the attendance of GDHF's parents at the hearing. Ultimately, the Tribunal was satisfied, on a holistic view of the evidence, that GDHF was who she claimed to be.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and remitted the matter to the Minister for reconsideration, with a direction that the prohibition in section 24(3) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth) did not apply.