Harjani and Minister for Home Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral, where the applicant's approval for citizenship had been cancelled by the Minister for Home Affairs under section 25 of the *Australian Citizenship Act*. The applicant, a Canadian citizen, was residing and working in Canada at the time of the Minister's decision. The dispute before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was whether the applicant was likely to reside in Australia or maintain a close and continuing association with Australia.

The Tribunal was required to determine two key legal issues. Firstly, whether the applicant was likely to reside or continue to reside in Australia. Secondly, whether the applicant was likely to maintain a close and continuing association with Australia. These determinations were to be made in light of the criteria set out in section 25(2)(b)(ii) of the Act and the guidance provided in the Citizenship Policy.

The Tribunal applied established legal principles, drawing on previous AAT decisions such as *Ho and Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs* (1994) 34 ALD 664, which held that "likely to reside" means residing immediately or very soon after being granted citizenship. The Tribunal considered the applicant's submissions regarding his professional and cultural ties to Australia, his financial assets, and his extended family in Australia. However, it noted that the applicant had been absent from Australia for 18 months and was residing in Canada with his Canadian spouse, who suffered from illnesses and was not an Australian permanent resident. The applicant's employment in Canada was ongoing, and he had no immediate plans to return to Australia. The Tribunal found that the evidence did not demonstrate an intention to reside in Australia immediately or very soon after citizenship approval, nor did it establish a close and continuing association with Australia.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Minister's decision to cancel the applicant's approval for Australian citizenship. The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the criteria of being likely to reside in Australia or maintain a close and continuing association with Australia, as required by section 25(2)(b)(ii) of the *Australian Citizenship Act*.