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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral, which was refused by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the character requirements for citizenship, specifically in light of the provision of false documents and information during the application process. The decision was made by Mrs J C Kelly, Senior Member.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant was a person of good character as required by section 21(2)(h) of the relevant Act, and consequently, whether the delegate's decision to refuse the citizenship application should be affirmed. The Tribunal was required to consider the meaning of "good character" in the context of the Act, and the application of the Citizenship Procedural Instruction 15 (CPI 15) in assessing this requirement.

The Tribunal reasoned that the term "good character" is not defined in the Act and is to be interpreted broadly, allowing for a discretionary value judgment confined by the statutory provisions. CPI 15, which outlines the assessment of character, was accepted as a guide to be followed unless there were cogent reasons to depart. Part 3.3 of CPI 15 defines "enduring moral qualities" as characteristics demonstrated over a long period, distinguishing right from wrong and behaving ethically. Part 4 states that deception or fraud, including intentionally providing false information or material deception during applications, generally indicates a lack of good character. The Tribunal noted that knowingly presenting incorrect information or bogus documents may reflect negatively on a person's character. While acknowledging that refugees may face difficulties in obtaining evidence and that the applicant had been accepted as a refugee, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant demonstrated good character.

The Tribunal affirmed the reviewable decision made by the Respondent's delegate to refuse the grant of Australian citizenship. It was deemed unnecessary to consider the applicant's identity, as the primary ground for refusal related to character.