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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral by the Applicant, a 33-year-old male citizen of Sri Lanka. The Applicant had applied for citizenship in 2018, but during the application process, a criminal history check revealed prior traffic offences and a conviction for sexual assault, breach of a domestic violence order, and failing to comply with bail conditions. The Applicant had answered "no" to a question on his application form regarding any court convictions, including traffic offences. The Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs refused the application on the grounds that the Applicant was not of good character. The Applicant sought review of this decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Applicant satisfied the character requirement for Australian citizenship under section 21(2)(h) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth), which requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant is of good character at the time of the decision. This involved determining the weight to be given to the Applicant's prior convictions, his explanation for failing to disclose them on his application, and the evidence of his character witnesses.

The Tribunal acknowledged that Australian citizenship is a privilege and that the character requirement is a significant aspect of the application process, designed to ensure that only those who uphold Australian values and are willing to contribute positively to the community are granted citizenship. While the Tribunal found the Applicant's character witnesses to be credible, it limited the weight of their evidence due to their lack of detailed understanding of the Applicant's full criminal history and limited day-to-day contact. The Tribunal also noted an inconsistency between one witness's assertion of the Applicant's remorse for a sexual assault conviction and the Applicant's own evidence at the hearing. Despite accepting that the Applicant had made some positive contributions to the Australian community through his business and tax compliance, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the Applicant was of good character at the time of the decision, particularly in light of his failure to disclose his convictions and the nature of those convictions.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the grant of Australian citizenship. The Tribunal noted that the Applicant might be able to satisfy the good character requirement at a later time, after demonstrating a longer period of positive contribution to the Australian community.