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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by the Applicant, who was born in India in 1972. The dispute arose because the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs refused the application, finding the Applicant was not of "good character" as required by section 21(2)(h) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth). The Applicant sought review of this decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant possessed the "good character" required for citizenship, specifically considering the meaning of "enduring moral qualities" as outlined in the Citizenship policy. This involved assessing whether a sufficient period had passed since the Applicant's criminal offending to establish a pattern of good behaviour, and whether his character demonstrated the ability to distinguish right from wrong and behave ethically in accordance with Australian societal values. The Tribunal also had to consider evidence relating to the Applicant's mental health, his remorse, and his interactions with legal and law enforcement authorities.

The Tribunal reasoned that "good character" refers to enduring moral qualities demonstrated over a long period, not merely good standing in the community. It noted that while the Applicant had not committed an offence since June 2017, this period was insufficient to establish the required pattern of good behaviour, particularly given his history of offending, including a breach of a good behaviour bond. The Tribunal found that the Applicant had not demonstrated genuine remorse, had largely maintained his innocence, and continued to criticise law enforcement, the courts, and victims of his offending. Furthermore, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the Applicant had addressed the underlying mental health and personality issues that contributed to his offending, nor had he provided evidence of engaging in anger management. The Tribunal concluded that these factors, combined with a lack of sustained engagement with mental health treatment, meant it could not be satisfied that the Applicant possessed the enduring moral qualities necessary to uphold and obey Australian laws.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Minister, finding that the Applicant had not satisfied the requirements of section 21(2)(h) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* regarding good character.