Grafton and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by descent by a 68-year-old man born in New Zealand. The applicant had a history of offending from 1963 to 2015, though his offending had been limited to traffic infringements since 2007. The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection had refused the application on the grounds that the applicant was not of good character. The applicant sought a review of this decision by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant was of good character at the time of the Minister's decision, as mandated by section 16(3) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 1948* (Cth). The meaning of "good character" was to be interpreted in its ordinary sense, referring to a person's enduring moral qualities demonstrated objectively over a sufficient period, rather than their reputation in the community. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's history of chronic alcoholism and his participation in rehabilitation programs, as well as his conduct following the hearing.

The Tribunal noted that while the applicant had not been convicted of serious offences since 2004 and had attended rehabilitation clinics for alcoholism and anger management in the past, these programs were completed over a decade prior to the application. The Tribunal expressed doubt as to whether the applicant had genuinely been rehabilitated, particularly given incidents in 2005 and 2007. Crucially, subsequent to the hearing, the applicant engaged in a pattern of persistent and aggressive phone calls to the respondent's solicitor, including instances where he appeared intoxicated and used offensive language. This conduct significantly undermined any assertion of good character.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that he was of good character at the time of the Minister's decision. Consequently, the application for citizenship by descent was refused.