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

This matter concerned an application for the resumption of Australian citizenship by the applicant, who had previously ceased to be an Australian citizen. The delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs had refused the application, finding that the applicant did not meet the good character requirements under paragraph 29(3)(b) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth) due to criminal offences and a resulting term of imprisonment. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was tasked with reviewing this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was a person of good character at the time of the decision. The Tribunal considered the meaning of "good character" as it applies to citizenship applications, noting that it is not defined in the Act. Guidance was drawn from Citizenship Procedural Instruction 15 and the Australian Citizenship Policy Statement, which, while not strictly binding, are government policies to be considered if consistent with the Act. The Tribunal also referred to established case law, including *Irving v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs*, which defines good character as referring to a person's enduring moral qualities rather than their public standing.

The Tribunal reasoned that the concept of enduring moral qualities involves demonstrating characteristics over a significant period, distinguishing right from wrong, and behaving ethically in accordance with societal rules and values. It was also noted that the grant of citizenship is a privilege, reflecting the community's right to decide who becomes a fellow citizen, and is not intended as a further punishment for criminal conduct. In assessing the applicant's character, the Tribunal considered the seriousness of his offences, particularly in light of the substantial sentence of imprisonment imposed, which was 45 years and 8 months.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not positively satisfied that the applicant was of good character at the time of the decision. Consequently, the decision under review to refuse the application for the resumption of Australian citizenship was affirmed.