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

LGXQ and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship) [2022] AATA 2159 (8 July 2022)
AppID:  LGXQ and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs
MatterType:    Citizenship
Division:GENERAL DIVISION
File Number:          2019/7591
Re:LGXQ
APPLICANT

AndMinister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs
RESPONDENT

DECISION
Tribunal:Senior Member A. Nikolic AM CSC
Date:8 July 2022
Place:Melbourne

The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
............. .......[sgd]....................................................
Senior Member A. Nikolic AM CSC
CATCHWORDS
CITIZENSHIP – application for conferral of Australian citizenship – Faili Kurd – whether the Tribunal is satisfied of the Applicant’s identity – s 24 Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth) – National Identity Proofing Guidelines – Revised Citizenship Procedural Instructions – three pillars of identity – no biometrics or original documents – Applicant questions accuracy of some documents he submitted – inconsistencies in life story – Tribunal not satisfied of Applicant’s identity – decision affirmed
LEGISLATION
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
Australian Citizenship Act 2007
Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
CASES
Dhayakpa and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2015) 148 ALD 162
Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Re (No 2) (1979) 2 ALD 634
Hneidi and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCAFC 20
Minister for Home Affairs v G (2019) 164 ALD 103
SECONDARY MATERIALS
Attorney-General’s Department, National Identity Proofing Guidelines (2016)
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Country Information Report Iran (21 April 2016)
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Country Information Report No. 10/13 – Iran: Faili Kurds (19 March 2010)
Department of Immigration and Border Protection, Australian Citizenship Policy Statement (27 November 2020)
Refugee, Citizenship and Multicultural Programs Division, Department of Home Affairs, Revised Citizenship Procedural Instructions (1 January 2019)
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum, Australian Citizenship Bill 2007 (Cth)
REASONS FOR DECISION
Senior Member A. Nikolic AM CSC
8 July 2022
INTRODUCTION

The Applicant seeks review of a decision by a delegate of the Respondent dated 23 October 2019, to refuse his application for conferral of Australian citizenship under the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth) (the Act).
The hearing was held in Melbourne on 30 June and 1 July 2022. The Applicant appeared in person and was assisted by an interpreter in the Persian language. He was represented by Ms Jill Vidler, who acted for the Applicant on a pro bono basis and appeared via video from Sydney. The Tribunal acknowledges and thanks Ms Vidler for her efforts. The Respondent was represented by Mr Alexander Zhang from Clayton Utz.
For the following reasons the Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
APPLICANT’S IDENTITY
The Tribunal has applied a confidentiality order and anonym for the Applicant because he was previously granted a Protection Visa.[1] He is referred to as ‘LGXQ’ and certain details will be redacted that might tend to identify him.
[1] Pursuant to s 35 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act1975 (Cth) and s 501K of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).
BACKGROUND
The Applicant is approaching 50 years of age and was born in Baghdad, Iraq.[2] He arrived in Australia alone over a decade ago as an unauthorised maritime arrival.[3] He transited through Dubai, Malaysia, and Indonesia[4] on what he claimed was a ‘fake passport’ purchased in Iran. He received an Indonesian visa on arrival at Jakarta International Airport. His mother, five siblings, and other relatives and friends continue to live in Iran.[5]
[2] Exhibit R2, 229.
[3] Ibid 191; 205; 210.
[4] Ibid 204.
[5] Ibid 239.
On 30 July 2012, the Applicant was granted a Protection (Subclass 866) visa,[6] by virtue of which he has the right to permanently reside in Australia.[7]
[6] Ibid 390.
[7] Ibid 421.
On 5 May 2017, the Applicant lodged an application for conferral of citizenship. [8] He stated that his date of birth was 1 January 1975 and he never had a different date of birth. In support of this application, he provided a statutory declaration,[9] which stated in part:
I am stateless by birth. I do not hold Iranian or any other country’s Identity as my parents are stateless. We do not have any records of their birth because I am Faylee Kurdish and my parents have been deported and exiled into enforce by Iraqi government in 1980 to Iran but Iranian officials do not give us any identity.
I would like my application to be considered by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection; however I cannot provide my birth certificate due to the above reasons…
(Errors in original)
[8] Exhibit R1, 151.
[9] Ibid 171.
On 20 April 2018, the Respondent asked the Applicant to provide documents relating to his identity prior to arrival in Australia. The letter detailed a list of documents suitable for this purpose.[10] The Applicant did not respond, and a further request was sent to him on 26 July 2018.[11] No response was received to this request.[12]
[10] Ibid 181.
[11] Ibid 186.
[12] Ibid 15.
On 23 October 2019, a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs refused the application because they were not satisfied of the Applicant’s identity.[13] On 20 November 2019, the Applicant asked the Tribunal to review this decision.[14] In response to the question on the application form asking: ‘Why do you claim the decision is wrong?,’ the Applicant stated:
The department sent me an email requesting for additional information, which I didn’t check on time. As a result my application for citizenship was refused because I didn’t provide the requested information on time. I was also suffering from mental health issues at the time and I am still learning how to use the emails. After I received the decision, my counsellor helped me trace the email that the department was referred in the decision and I found that email. I am now providing the additional identify documents that I manage to get. I am requesting for a review of my application for citizenship.[15]
[13] Ibid 10.
[14] Ibid 6.
[15] Ibid 7.
It has now been five years since the Applicant lodged his citizenship application. There have been multiple postponements at his request. Contributing factors include health problems, a desire for an in-person hearing, COVID-19 restrictions, technical difficulties in providing him with material obtained under summons (such as audio files), and the Applicant’s efforts to secure legal representation. Several requests were also received from both parties to extend the time for scheduling orders.
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
A person can apply for Australian citizenship under s 21(1) of the Act.
The Preamble to the Act states:
The Parliament recognises that Australian citizenship represents full and formal membership of the community of the Commonwealth of Australia, and Australian citizenship is a common bond, involving reciprocal rights and obligations, uniting all Australians, while respecting their diversity.
The Parliament recognises that persons conferred Australian citizenship enjoy these rights and undertake to accept these obligations:
(a)       by pledging loyalty to Australia and its people; and
(b)       by sharing their democratic beliefs; and
(c)       by respecting their rights and liberties; and
(d)       by upholding and obeying the laws of Australia.
Section 25(1)(a) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) and s 52(1)(b) of the Act are the sources of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to review decisions under s 24 of the Act.
Section 24 of the Act confers a general power on the Minister to either approve or refuse to approve an application made under s 21 of the Act. Specified circumstances at ss 24(3) to (7) of the Act preclude the Minister from granting citizenship, including if the Minister is not satisfied of the person’s identity:[16]
There may be cases where identity is unclear or cannot be satisfactorily ascertained. In these circumstances the Minister cannot approve the person becoming an Australian citizen.[17]
[16] Division 5 of the Act sets out identity provisions at ss 40-45.
[17] Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum, Australian Citizenship Bill 2007 (Cth).
Citizenship Policy and Procedural Instructions
A decision-maker exercising power under the Act can be guided by government policy.[18] For this application it includes the Australian Citizenship Policy Statement (2020), Australian Citizenship Procedural Instruction 16 ‘CPI 16-Assessing Identity under the Citizenship Act’ (CPI 16) and the National Identity Proofing Guidelines (Guidelines). These are collectively referred to as the ‘policy documents.’
[18] See, for example, Hneidi and Ors v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2010] FCAFC 20 at [41].
The Full Court of the Australian Federal Court has held that the discretion to approve or refuse citizenship is unfettered, and ‘not inimical to the adoption of executive policy…to guide the exercise of discretion.’[19] Their Honours reasoned that the Act envisaged the application of executive policy to promote consistency and rationality in decision-making.[20] Each case before the Tribunal is considered afresh, and government policy is ordinarily considered unless there is a cogent reason not to do so.[21] The Tribunal has not identified any reason why it should not consider the policy documents.
[19] Minister for Home Affairs v G (2019) 164 ALD 103, 120 [64].
[20] Ibid, [65]; [70].
[21]Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Re (No 2) (1979) 2 ALD 634.
The term ‘identity’ is not defined in the Act. Paragraph 2.1.1. of the Guidelines describes it in the following terms:
A person’s identity is not a fixed concept; it is highly dependent on context. It is some combination of characteristics or attributes that allow a person to be uniquely distinguished from others within a specific context.
CPI16 relevantly describes three pillars comprising biometrics, documents, and life story, as the foundation on which assessments of identity are made:

Pillar of Identity

Individual Characteristics

Biometrics

Personal identifiers, which include fingerprints, facial images, or a person's signature. Biometrics can be used for comparison, with, for example, facial images held by the Department or other domestic or international agencies.

Documents

Only reliable identity documents can satisfy this pillar. A reliable identity document is issued with robust identity proofing processes along with issuance protocols and security features. Documents contain biodata, or personal information, such as name, date of birth, nationality, and/or citizenship, and may also contain biometric information.

Life Story

A person's life story is a narrative of the events that happened to them from birth to present. Officers should consider the events that happened to the person, and the information and detail correlating to the events. A person's life story may include descriptions of family composition, education, employment, countries of residence, countries visited, social footprint, and online presence.

Decision makers are counselled not to rely on a single pillar in isolation, but to comprehensively:
…test and evaluate a person's claims with regard to their identity, decision-makers should consider each pillar. In most cases the consideration of the three pillars is embedded in the identity assessment process. The citizenship Applicant is likely to be well documented, information provided to the Department will have remained consistent over a long period of time, and no inconsistencies or concerns will have been identified.
Through their reliability and comprehensiveness, identity documents testify to important events in the Applicant’s life story. Through personal identifiers contained in identity documents the Applicant’s biometrics held on departmental records are matched and confirmed.
Additional guidance is provided in the following terms:
4.12 How do I assess a person’s identity – an evidence based approach
In order to make an informed assessment of a person’s identity, officers must seek to establish a person’s identity from birth using an evidence-based approach. It is not sufficient to be satisfied of a person’s identity at one point in time, as a person’s identity is not a point in time concept; it must be verified incrementally throughout a person’s life and considered historically.
The way in which officers should approach the concept of assessing a person’s identity from birth is to create an identity timeline, thus creating a complete picture of the person’s identity from birth to present. The objective is to link the Applicant’s identity at birth to the identity provided in their application for Australian citizenship by considering key chronological events in the person’s life. The three pillars are the methodology for establishing a person’s identity, and officers must turn their mind to the individual characteristics in order to piece together a person’s identity timeline and create an ‘identity picture’.
…
4.14 Assessing pillar two – documents
Documents are an important element of the process in establishing a person’s identity. While they do not establish or verify a person’s identity in and of themselves, they contribute to a person’s identity timeline by providing an anchor to corroborate information pursuant to pillar one (biometrics) and pillar three (life story).
When assessing pillar two, decision-makers should consider and assess whether the documents and information they contain are consistent, or otherwise, and whether they element support or refute a person’s claimed identity. The crucial element of a document, whether genuine or not, is the story the document tells. Documents need not be identity documents to tell a story. For instance, a hotel invoice may demonstrate a person’s presence in a particular place at a point in time.
…
4.15 Assessing pillar three – life story
When assessing a person’s life story in the context of a citizenship application, officers should seek to create a complete identity ‘picture’ of the person from birth. This is not done by asking a person to recite their life story in interview. Instead, a practical way in which to begin an assessment of a person’s identity, while at the same time considering their life story, is to consider their identity timeline.
…
In most cases, by the time a person applies for Australian citizenship, they will have interacted with the Department and previously provided aspects of their life story. Where necessary, officers should locate the information provided during these interactions, plot it on the person’s identity timeline, and compare it with information provided at the time of applying for Australian citizenship.
Example – testing information pursuant to the pillars of identity
A person’s identity story can include, but is not limited to, their age compared to
their:
·education, employment, places of residence, marriage and divorce;
·extended family history including:
obirth of children, births and deaths of siblings and parents, date of marriage.
Example – the importance of family composition
Family relationships can be very useful when establishing an individual’s identity. Relationships form an important characteristic of a person’s life story. It is important for officers to compare the family composition provided by the Applicant at various interactions with the Department.
In order to corroborate information, officers should examine the family composition provided to the Department by the citizenship Applicant’s claimed family members, as well as the particulars of the information. There are generally common elements between family members who travelled to Australia together, or were from the same village. Independent corroborating evidence for a particular fact or interpretation means that the fact or interpretation is more likely to be true.
Paragraph 5.1 of the AGD Guidelines establishes that where a person cannot meet the minimum identity requirements, alternative identity proofing processes may be undertaken, encompassing:
·     Acceptance of alternative types of evidence of identity (such as multiple types of SECONDARY evidence types where normally a PRIMARY evidence type would be required).
·     Verification of the person’s claimed identity with a trusted referee whose identity has been (or is being) verified to an equal or greater level of assurance.
·     Verification of a person’s claimed identity with reputable organisations or bodies known to them…
·     A detailed interview with the person about their life story to assess the consistency and legitimacy of their claims.
ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
The only issue for determination is whether the Tribunal is satisfied of the Applicant’s identity for the purposes of section 24(3) of the Act.
EVIDENCE
Documentary evidence
The following were tendered into evidence:
(a)Tribunal documents collectively numbering 493 pages;[22]
[22] Exhibit R1.
(b)Transcript of interview from Christmas Island on 25 February 2011;[23]
[23] Exhibit R2.
(c)Statutory declaration of the Applicant dated 23 March 2021;[24]
(d)A letter from the Applicant’s counsellor at Foundation House, dated 23 March 2021;[25]
(e)A letter from a registrar at Western Health dated 23 August 2021;[26]
(f)A diagnostic record from Western Health filed on 26 April 2022;[27]
(g)A letter from the Applicant’s treating general practitioner dated 18 March 2021;[28]
(h)A translated record titled Certificate of Completion of 5 Year Primary School Education;[29]
(i)A translated record purporting to be an identity card from an Iranian high school;[30]
(j)A further statutory declaration from the Applicant dated 26 August 2021;[31] and
(k)A translated record purporting to be a copy of the Applicant’s White Card in Iran, issued on 16 November 2002.[32]
[24] Exhibit A1.
[25] Exhibit A2.
[26] Exhibit A3.
[27] Exhibit A4.
[28] Exhibit A5.
[29] Exhibit A6.
[30] Exhibit A7.
[31] Exhibit A8.
[32] Exhibit A9.
Applicant’s documentary evidence
Upon arrival into Australia, the Applicant completed a form in Arabic, which was translated by an interpreter.[33] He stated that his birthdate was ‘3/1975’,[34] his citizenship was ‘Faili Kurd,’[35] he had a white card located in Iran,[36] and was also in possession of an Iraqi citizenship card issued to him while living in Baghdad.[37] He stated that five siblings were living in Iran.[38] An interpreter certification was provided at the end of this document stating the Applicant ‘fully understood the questions presented in this form’.[39]
[33] Exhibit R1, 195-201.
[34] Ibid 195 [Q7].
[35] Ibid 195 [Q9].
[36] Ibid 196 [Q12].
[37] Ibid 196.
[38] Ibid 199.
[39] Ibid 200.
Five days later, on 13 February 2011, the Applicant attended another interview with Australian immigration officials, which lasted for approximately three hours. He was assisted by an interpreter in the Kurdish language[40] and made the following claims:
[40] Ibid, 205-228.
(a)He is a Shia Muslim and a stateless person of Kurdish-Faili ethnicity, who was born in a Baghdad suburb. His birthdate is recorded with a line through the day of birth, but the month and year are recorded as 3/1975;[41]
[41] Ibid 206.
(b)He was the fourth of six children born to his parents between 1968 and 1986, and all of his siblings live in Iran;
(c)His family was deported to Iran in 1980 because of the Iran-Iraq War. The Applicant was then an infant, but claimed his parents retained his Iraqi identity card, which was then located in Ilam Province Iran;
(d)He lived in Ilam Province until 2011 and attended school for approximately 12 years. He claimed to have been arrested and held by Iranian authorities for five days in 1991 and for two days in 1992, because he wore a t-shirt and shaved off his beard;
(e)He applied with other family members for Iranian citizenship but they were refused;
(f)After leaving school he worked illegally as a painter and Arabic-Farsi translator until 2010, claiming to have been discriminated against by being paid less, having no job security, or other ‘basic rights;’[42]
(g)He was issued with Iranian identity cards (Green Card in 1980 and White Card in 2002), but both were taken by Iranian officials without replacement.[43] This meant he could not enrol in tertiary study, travel without permission of security forces, open a bank account, buy property, or take out a loan.[44] He claimed to have never previously travelled and could not leave Ilam Province without a White Card because:[45] ‘They did not provide me with identification…I did not have identification.’
(h)He was the only member of his family involved in political activities in support of the Iraqi Kurdistan Democratic Party. Because of his multilingualism, he was entrusted with supervising election booths in Iran. He stated this was his only political role, and he was not involved in any anti-Iranian-Government activities or protests;
(i)He never married or fathered children, claiming to have been ‘emotionally abused’ by the family of a woman he loved because of his Kurdish ethnicity, which caused him to become ‘emotionally defeated;’[46]
(j)After he paid USD$3000 in cash, a man in Iran gave him an Iranian passport containing his name and photograph.[47] The Applicant said he purchased his own airline ticket and departed Tehran International Airport for Kuala Lumpur in January 2011, where he stayed for a night in a hotel. He then flew to Jakarta where he applied for and was granted a visa. He met another Iranian man at the Airport who facilitated his onward travel to Australia for USD$2000 in cash. He commenced the journey to Australia 16 days later in a people smuggler vessel;
(k)His father died of cancer, but his mother and siblings continue to live in Iran. On arrival in Australia, he nominated his eldest brother and a sister as emergency contacts by providing their telephone numbers to immigration authorities;
(l)He knew no one on the people smuggling vessel delivering him to Australia, nor anyone else in Australia;
(m)He was unable to return to Iran because if returned, the authorities would imprison him because he left illegally and charge him with ‘treason and spying.’[48]
[42] Ibid, 214.
[43] Ibid 224.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Ibid 222.
[46] Ibid, 214.
[47] Ibid, 218.
[48] Ibid, 222.

In a Personal Particulars Form, the Applicant was asked about ‘any identity documents…you currently use or have used in the past’.[49] The only entry below the question refers to an identity document from Iraq. He also referred to undertaking four or five trips to Iraq of 20-30 days each since 2003, for the purpose of ‘researching options for getting back [his family’s] confiscated properties.’[50]
[49] Ibid 230 [Q14].
[50] Ibid 233.
Nine days later, on 22 February 2011, the Applicant attended a further interview where his representations were recorded as follows: [51]
[51] Ibid, 240-254.
(a)His date of birth was 1 January 1975;
(b)He departed from Iran illegally with a false passport that was subsequently taken by the people smuggler in Indonesia who arranged his travel to Australia;
(c)He possessed an Iranian Green Card from 1982 to 2002 and a White Card from 2002, which were both taken by the ‘Iranian Government’.[52]
[52] Ibid 245 [Q29].
(d)He was unable to apply for a passport in Iran because he had ‘no identity documents;’[53]
[53] Ibid 245 [Q31].
(e)He claimed to be able to obtain his ‘birth certificate’ from family in Iran;[54]
[54] Ibid 245.
(f)When asked if he or his family had any contact with police or security / intelligence organisations, the response ‘N/A’ is entered;[55]
[55] Ibid 250 [Q13].
(g)In an accompanying Statutory Declaration dated 22 February 2011,[56] taken with the assistance of an interpreter,[57] the Applicant contended:
[56] Ibid, 255-258.
[57] Ibid 259.
(i)His father served in the Iraqi Army and became a ‘famous businessman’, owning several businesses in Iraq, which enabled the family to live in a large house with servants;
(ii)His family and other Faili Kurds were expelled to Iran by the Saddam Hussein regime in 1980 and their assets were seized. The Applicant stated his family was ‘not able to take anything when [they] were deported, just [their] clothes’;[58]
(iii)The Applicant took a new name, [redacted], on arrival at the Iranian refugee camp, because his previous name, [redacted], was ‘poorly regarded in Iran’;
(iv)Iranian authorities issued his family White Cards in 2002, but took them back in 2006, which left them ‘without any documents’;[59]
(v)Faili Kurds were unable to legally register the births of their children or marriages, could not have a bank account or property, were denied free healthcare, and could go to school but no qualification certificate was issued for secondary school, thereby prevented him from attending university. Faili Kurds could not travel without permission;
(vi)He worked under a false name in a low paid job and was paid less than an Iranian worker for the same work;
(vii)He was an Olympic standard sportsman but was not selected because of his ethnicity;
(viii)During the Iraqi Presidential Election in 2009, he supported the Democratic Kurdistan Party and returned to Iraq illegally several times;[60]
(ix)He was detained three times by ‘Etala’at’,[61]for one day each time, because they wanted him to ‘spy’ for them, but he refused these offers.[62] This caused him to become ‘stressed’ and cease his political activities;
(x)He travelled to Iraq ‘a few times’; and
(xi)He fled Iran in January 2011 on a false passport[63] owing to ‘fears of persecution from…security agencies of the Iranian Government,’ including because he had ‘lived in Iran illegally all nearly all my life and I left illegally’.[64]
[58] Ibid 255.
[59] Ibid 256 [4].
[60] Ibid 257 [11].
[61] Iranian intelligence service.
[62] Exhibit R1, 257.
[63] Ibid 257 [12]
[64] Ibid 255 [2].
In a separate Personal Particulars Form, the Applicant claimed that while living in Iran he undertook four or five visits to Iraq of ‘around 20-30 days each time since 2003,’ to research options for getting his family’s confiscated properties back.[65] The Applicant signed this form, which was completed with the assistance of a Persian interpreter,[66] to the effect that his responses were ‘…complete, correct, and up to date in every detail’.[67]
[65] Ibid, 233 [Q26].
[66] Ibid 254.
[67] Ibid 253.
On 25 February 2011, the Applicant attended a refugee status assessment (“RSA”) interview during which he stated that his previous request for Iraqi citizenship was not approved. Other claims during this interview, contained in a transcript tendered by the Respondent,[68] were as follows:
(a) He was born in 1975 but could not recall the date;[69]
(b) He did not possess identity documents at the time but said his brother in Iran, who lived in Tehran and was self-employed in a bazaar,[70] would fax his parents’ Iraqi identification documents to Australia;[71]
(c) He had a Green Card issued by Iranian authorities that was valid in 2002 and a White Card with an ‘open’ date, which Iranian authorities took without replacement in 2006.[72]
[68] Exhibit R2.
[69] Ibid [111].
[70] Ibid [140]; [505]-525].
[71] Ibid [115]; [140]; [290].
[72] Ibid [315]-[345].
The Applicant stated in a Statutory Declaration dated 28 February 2011 that he returned to Iraq several times, most recently in 2009, to enquire at a ‘government office in Karada’ about reclaiming his family’s land.[73] The Applicant described Karada as an upper-class suburb of Baghdad where his father had owned property. He claimed to have discovered during this visit that his family’s former home was ‘an office for the Mahdi Army a Shia fanatical group,’ and his father’s other properties were transferred to new owners.[74]
[73] Ibid 316 [6].
[74] Ibid 317 [13].
The Applicant claimed Iraqi authorities told him his ‘Iraqi nationality had been declined’ because of long residence in Iran.[75] The Iraqi identity cards that the Applicant has produced state his mother was born in Baghdad, Iraq, and is of Iraqi origin.[76] The Applicant also claimed his family’s Iranian white cards ‘were not renewed after 2006,’ forcing him to work unlawfully and suffer other restrictions and deprivations.[77] He claimed he was approached several times by an Iranian intelligence agency to spy for them, which he refused, resulting in him being ‘detained for short periods’ for refusing to cooperate.[78] He said they let him go because they had no ‘documents or proof against me’. At no stage in his documentary evidence did the Applicant make claims about being tortured by Iranian authorities. The Applicant signed Statutory Declarations to certify his understanding that ‘a person who intentionally makes a false statement in a statutory declaration is guilty of an offence under section 11 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1959 (Cth)’.[79]
[75] Ibid 316 [7].
[76] Ibid, 307; 309.
[77] Ibid 318 [22].
[78] Ibid 319 [25].
[79] Ibid 319.
On 5 April 2011, the Applicant provided several untranslated records to the Respondent,[80] some of which were subsequently translated by the Refugee & Immigration Legal Centre Inc and accompanied his Refugee Status Assessment submissions.[81] This included claims that the Applicant’s father’s origin was ‘listed as Iranian’ but ‘the applicant maintains that his mother’s parents are Iranian despite the documents stating her origin as Iraqi’.[82] Reference was also made to:
(a) An identity card the Applicant ‘obtained when he visited Iraq’;[83]
(b) The Applicant having ‘made numerous attempts to assert rights in Iraq to regain family property;’[84]
(c) The Applicant having ‘lived without a white card since 2006 and suffered pervasive discrimination amounting to persecution as a result…[of having]…no documents,’ and was consequently ‘at risk of coming to the attention of the Iranian authorities whilst engaging in conduct to ensure his survival’;[85]
(d) An electoral observer card issued to the Applicant on 28 February 2010, which is in a different family name to the name he claims his family adopted upon arrival in Iran thirty years earlier.[86]
(e) Importantly, neither the Applicant nor Refugee Legal on his behalf have ever made any claims he was arrested and tortured by Iranian authorities as the reason for his departure: ‘He has not stated he has ever been placed in detention or suffered other adverse treatment from any Iranian authorities’.[87] In terms of the purported approaches from Etela’at, the Applicant claimed that Etela’at: ‘sought to persuade him rather than intimidate him’. His representations about fears of removal from Australia centred on a ‘continuing risk of persecution’ by Iranian authorities by virtue of his ethnicity, status as an undocumented Faili Kurd, and illegal departure from the country.
[80] Ibid 280-293.
[81] Ibid 294-304.
[82] Ibid 294.
[83] Ibid.
[84] Ibid 297.
[85] Ibid 295.
[86] Ibid 311; 314.
[87] Ibid 344.
On 5 May 2011, an officer of the Respondent found that the Applicant was not a refugee as defined by The Refugee Convention,[88] because there was not a real chance he would suffer ‘treatment amounting to persecution for any of the five convention grounds in the foreseeable future.’[89]
[88] Ibid 321-322.
[89] Ibid 349.
The Applicant sought independent merits review and, on 27 January 2012,[90] the Department accepted the recommendation of an Independent Reviewer to recognise him as a refugee, based on his ‘well-founded fear of persecution in Iran by reason of his ethnicity (being a Faili Kurd) and his membership of a particular social group (being displaced persons of Iraqi origin).’[91] The Independent Reviewer noted the Applicant’s claim that his family’s ‘White Cards were not renewed after 2006 and the claimant and his family have been left without documentation ever since.’[92] It was also noted he:
[90] Ibid 383.
[91] Ibid 382.
[92] Ibid 361.
…was not involved in any political activities apart from his 2009 polling booth duties. He did no political work for the Kurdish movement and nothing against the Iranian regime as his views towards the Iranian government are neutral. None of his other family members were involved in political matters.
…
He went to the area in Baghdad city where he was born [to] check on what was happening with [the house they previously owned]…It had become a ‘Basi base’ occupied by members of Saddam Hussein’s Hezbe Bass/Baasi’. He also went to see what happened to the other family houses, but they had been sold to private individuals who now held the property titles.
The claimant also went to a government office…to see what could be done about restoring the family’s very valuable “wealth and properties” …he was in Baghdad for “20 days, 1 month”, staying in a hotel…
Whilst in Iraq…the claimant states he obtained a [Kurdish Faili Card] while he was in Baghdad…
The claimant returned to Iraq for the second time 1-2 years later, this time with his elder brother to follow up on the results of his property restitution claim. They stayed for 7-10 days….
…The claimant has been back to Iraq approximately 6, 7, 8 times’…
…
The claimant has given some evidence he has attempted to re-assert his Iraqi citizenship.
…
The claimant has no right of return for Iraq because he had no White Card when he left…
…
The applicant’s white card was not renewed after 2006. Since this time the applicant has been living in Iran undocumented.
As the applicant was not officially enrolled in school, he was not issued certificates for the completion of school…
…the applicant has returned to Iraq around six to eight times…to attempt to have his citizenship reinstated…On each attempt the applicant was unsuccessful in regaining Iraqi citizenship.[93]
[93] Ibid 363-365.
It was submitted by the Applicant’s representative as part of the Independent Review that: ‘The applicant no longer holds a white card or any other form of identification recognised by Iran…the refusal of the Iranian authorities to even renew the white card of many Faili Kurds in recent times indicates an intention to force Failis out of Iran…The Applicant has been living undocumented in Iraq since 2006.’[94] The Applicant subsequently stated at interview: ‘…When I left in 2011 I had no ID card’.[95]
[94] Ibid 367.
[95] Ibid 369 [25].
The Independent Reviewer accepted the Applicant’s ‘experiences in Iran were as he claimed,’ that his white card ‘was surrendered and not reissued’, and that undocumented Faili Kurds in Iran ‘have significant limitations placed on their basic rights for education, employment, health, economic activity and movement’.[96] The Independent Reviewer accepted the Applicant had experienced ‘an inability to have a reasonable and appropriate level of education’[97] and other discriminatory outcomes in the context of a person ‘from whom all documentation has been withheld’.[98] The Independent Reviewer concluded that each individual aspect of discrimination relied upon by the Applicant:
…may arguably not be sufficiently severe to amount to persecution…the cumulative effect of a number of ‘lesser’ Convention related harms is sufficiently serious to constitute persecution’.
The reviewer accepts that the claimant’s situation as a displaced person without Iranian ID also means that he is vulnerable to adverse attention…[99]
[96] Ibid 380 [59].
[97] Ibid 380 [61].
[98] Ibid 381 [66].
[99] Ibid 381 [67].
In his Protection Visa application dated July 2012, the Applicant’s claims included that he completed secondary school but was not given a certificate because he ‘did not have any ID card’,[100] had not travelled outside of Iran prior to his journey to Australia,[101] and had not applied to migrate to any country other than Australia.[102]
[100] Ibid 407 [Q38]; 411.
[101] Ibid 406 [Q34].
[102] Ibid 416 [Q59].
Applicant’s oral evidence
The Applicant gave extensive oral evidence over a day-and-a-half with the assistance of interpreters in the Persian language. He is clearly an intelligent man who speaks four languages and some English. Several adjournments were provided when the Applicant experienced physical discomfort, and he was invited to stand, sit, or move around as required. His evidence is summarised as follows:
(a)The Applicant suffered a minor stroke in February 2021 affecting his general health. He claimed to ‘keep forgetting things’ since 2022. He was also diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) at the end of 2021 and has been receiving treatment.
(b)He has consistently stated his birthday is 1975 since arriving in Australia. He claimed that his year of birth was changed by his father to 1974 in Iran, so he could start school early, which did not normally occur until six years of age. He recalled having a green card as his Iranian identity document and an identity card from primary school. The Applicant claimed that birthdays are not important in Kurdish or Arabic culture and ‘no-one asks you about your date of birth’, and to do so is a ‘bad omen’.
(c)He has five siblings. The two oldest are brothers and the next oldest is a sister. These three siblings were born in Iraq. His two youngest siblings are sisters and were born in Iran. His first name and his oldest sister’s first name were changed by his father upon the family’s arrival in Iran. The family started to use a different surname after moving to Iran. The only evidence for these name changes is the Applicant’s claims.
(d)His family received a white card as a replacement for their green cards in 2002. The Applicant said in 2006 Iranian authorities took away their white cards and: ‘were meant to give us another card but they didn’t give us anything in particular’. The Applicant agreed his family were left with ‘no card’ from 2006.
(e)He travelled from Iran on a ‘fake passport’ after he paid someone to procure it for him. He was told by this person that if he left Iran on this passport ‘you can’t come back.’
(f)When asked if he was able to get any documents from Iraq relevant to his identity, the Applicant said he could not. He said this was ‘because the situation in Iraq was not normal. If I went there, I’d be killed’. When asked by Ms Vidler if his mother had ‘anything to do with getting documents from Iraq’, the Applicant denied this, saying she is ‘too old and sick’. When asked about the Iraqi identification / citizenship documents he previously provided, the Applicant recalled his mother hid copies of these under her clothes upon the family’s expulsion from Iraq, but said the originals were taken by Iraqi authorities. He was aware of these documents while growing up in Iran, because his mother ‘talked about them and showed them to us’. When asked why he did not bring a copy of these documents to Australia, the Applicant said he was ‘scared’ to do so because he left illegally. The Applicant was taken by Ms Vidler through these documents, which he said were Iraqi identification and citizenship cards, and stated who each document was issued to.[103]
[103] Ibid 280-287.
(g)The Applicant explained that one of the cards in evidence was issued to him by the Kurdish Party in Iraq as the ‘head of a political group’. He explained this related to electoral and scrutineering duties enabling Kurds of Iraqi origin in Iran to vote in the 2010 Iraqi General Election. When asked by Ms Vidler if Iraqi citizenship gave you the right to vote in the 2010 Iraqi elections, the Applicant responded: ‘Yes and the white card.’ The Applicant claimed it was his activities as a ‘political activist’ that caused him to escape to Australia. When asked during cross-examination by Mr Zhang if these activities in 2010 were his only political involvement, the Applicant responded ‘yes’. He later changed this to say he was politically involved since the age of 17 ‘but not to this extent’. He claimed to have distributed pamphlets, put up posters, and tore down Iranian Government posters. He claimed his ‘father was also involved in politics’. When challenged that his claims on arrival in Australia were that his 2010 activity was his only political involvement, the Applicant said he thought this meant the first time he was involved in a ‘political campaign’.
(h)The Applicant claimed he was asked on several occasions to spy for the Iranian intelligence services but refused their approaches. He left Iran because of this, approximately two to four months after receiving these offers.
(i)During cross-examination by Mr Zhang, the Applicant was asked about the date of birth he conveyed to Australian authorities on arrival in Australia. He claimed that he did not know his precise date of birth so told authorities to record 01/01/1975 because it was ‘simple and easy’. When asked by Mr Zhang why a form he completed in Arabic on arrival at Christmas Island stated ‘3/1975’ the Applicant claimed the ‘3’ part of this response is ‘not in my handwriting’. When challenged, he subsequently agreed he wrote the number ‘3’ but could not explain why. When asked by Mr Zhang what he had to say about the correctness of that claimed date of birth, given he stated the same date in an interview with Departmental officials five days later,[104] the Applicant said he could not remember. When put to him that his repeated reliance on this date of birth at two separate interviews reflected an intention to tell the Department his date of birth was in the third month of 1975, the Applicant equivocated: ‘I don’t know – it may be…My Iraqi documents is one date and my Iranian documents another, so I don’t know which one is right’. The Applicant claimed that in his culture ‘the year is important but not the date’.
[104] Ibid 205.
(j)The Applicant was asked about the date of birth on an Iraqi identity / citizenship card he claimed is his and that he previously provided to the Respondent. He agreed the date shown on this document is 14/02/1975 and that it was obtained soon after his birth in Iraq. When asked why he did not convey this more accurate birth date when asked on Christmas Island, the Applicant said he could only remember the year but not the day or month.
(k)The Applicant was taken to his Statutory Declaration dated 23 March 2021, in which it stated his family verbally told him his birthdate translated to 9 December 1975, and the birthdate on his Iranian white card was 22 May 1974.[105] He claimed that his mother only told him this during a telephone call in either 2019 or 2020. When challenged that it seemed unusual his mother did not inform him about this in the previous 40 years, the Applicant insisted it was the first time he asked her about his ‘exact date of birth’. When put to the Applicant it seemed very unlikely he did not ask his mother about his specific date of birth until three years ago, he responded:
[105] Exhibit A1, [12].
I was busy with my life, writing articles, and there was no need to ask my mother – I didn’t have time to think about this. In Kurdish culture, asking about your date of birth is not nice and has a bad omen.
(l)When asked by Mr Zhang why he ticked the ‘No’ box in response to the question on his citizenship application: ‘Have you ever had a different date of birth to the one shown at Q6’,[106] the Applicant responded: ‘This was one of two or three mistakes by the guy who was filling in the form’. Mr Zhang put to the Applicant that his past provision of different dates of birth was an attempt to conceal his actual date of birth, to which the Applicant responded: ‘No – it’s not an important issue’.
(m)The Applicant said his family had relatives in Iran when they were expelled from Iraq in 1980 but were ‘not very close’ to them. When asked if these relatives had Iranian citizenship, he responded: ‘I don’t know’. The Applicant said his now deceased father owned a large fruit business in Iran. When asked what his eldest brother did in Iran, the Applicant said he runs ‘freelance businesses’. When asked what type, the Applicant equivocated: ‘He’s more like a middleman – he charges businesses a commission. If he sells dried fruit or spare parts, he works on commission’. When asked how his brother could work in the capital Tehran as an undocumented Faili Kurd, the Applicant said he ‘married an Iranian lady’, which obviated these difficulties. He claimed his brother did not need identity documents to operate businesses, which were only required when purchasing property. When pressed about his brother’s life in Tehran, the Applicant said he was not sure where his brother lives anymore because their relationship had deteriorated, and they were no longer in contact. When asked if his brother’s children are Iranian citizens, the Applicant said he is not sure.
(n)The Applicant was asked why he listed the birthplace for all his siblings in his citizenship application as ‘Baghdad, Iraq’.[107] He said this was a mistake by the person who completed the form. When asked why the day and month of birth for three of his siblings was listed as 23 September, the Applicant responded: ‘It may be a mistake – I don’t know’. He said he ‘trusted the guy’ who completed the form to get the information correct, but that person had not ‘done his job’. When asked to name the person who completed the form, the Applicant could not recall.
(o)The Applicant agreed he previously claimed in a Statutory Declaration that his family’s white cards were taken by Iranian officials following a ‘general order,’ and were not replaced. He was asked to respond to DFAT Country Information that there was no reluctance by Iranian authorities to issue white cards providing there was no exclusionary reason like criminal offending. The Applicant disagreed with Mr Zhang’s contention that it was very unlikely his white card, and those of his family were not replaced in 2006. When asked about the value of a white card to the bearer, the Applicant responded: ‘Nothing.’ He said its sole purpose was to ‘know people from a security point of view’ and only had to be produced if stopped by security officers. When asked if a white card was needed for everyday transactions or administrative requirements, the Applicant responded: ‘Not really.’ When put to the Applicant that even the security purpose he invoked made it very unlikely Iranian authorities would not re-issue white cards, he claimed that he made a copy of his white card before Iranian officials took it, got this copy laminated, and was able to use it after 2006 because it was acceptable to Iranian authorities. For the reasons later discussed, this gives rise to concerns about the Applicant’s claims upon arrival in Australia that he was an undocumented person living and working illegally in Iran. The Applicant also stated he had an identification card from his boxing club, linked to his claims that he was an Olympic standard boxer, which he also used for identification purposes.
(p)When asked why he did not tell Departmental officials on arrival in Australia that he had this copy of his white card after 2006, he responded: ‘I can’t answer a question they didn’t ask’. When pressed that officials could not ask a question that could only have been in the Applicant’s knowledge, his response was not of assistance. When asked who sent him the copy of this white card to Australia, the Applicant said his eldest sister did. When asked why he claimed in a Statutory Declaration dated 23 March 2021 that prior to leaving Iran he gave this white card to a ‘friend in Tehran’ and this friend sent it to him,[108] the Applicant claimed both versions were correct. He said his friend and sister both sent him documents. It was put to the Applicant by Mr Zhang that he lied to authorities on arrival in Australia about being undocumented, and the white card he has produced ‘is a recent invention that did not exist at the time of his interviews in 2011’. The Applicant said he did not lie, claiming the white card he produced ‘cannot be faked’. The Applicant agreed he never previously provided originals of any document despite numerous opportunities, stating: ‘In those days everyone had copies’.
(q)When asked by Mr Zhang if he ever applied for Iraqi citizenship since his family left Iraq in 1980, the Applicant denied doing so. When asked about the claim in his Statutory Declaration dated 28 February 2011 that ‘Iraqi authorities told me that my Iraqi nationality had been declined’,[109] the Applicant insisted: ‘I have not applied for Iraqi citizenship’. He claimed not to have been able to enquire about Iraqi citizenship because ‘there was no established Iraqi government at that time’. When asked about his claim during an interview in 2011 that he returned to Iraq to restore his citizenship and passport rights,[110] the Applicant responded: ‘I did not say that’. When put to him by Mr Zhang that he was not truthful at his Assessment Interview on Christmas Island and in a Statutory Declaration, he responded: ‘I do not remember exactly’. When asked whether it was possible he approached Iraqi authorities and was granted Iraqi citizenship, the Applicant denied this. When asked why the Tribunal should prefer his evidence to the information in the Assessment Interview, the Applicant responded: ‘I have no answer for that I don’t know what they’ve written there. Karada is a rich part of Baghdad there is no government there’.
(r)When asked about the last time he visited Iraq, the Applicant claimed he had never returned there since his family was expelled in 1980: ‘I haven’t been to Iraq – I only tried to go’. Mr Zhang challenged this as conflicting with the Applicant’s past claims, including in a Statutory Declaration.[111] The Applicant then changed his evidence to say he entered the porous border area between Iran and Iraq, claiming: ‘Our property is in Baghdad – it’s on the border, so you can just walk there.’ The Applicant named four towns in the border area between Iran and Iraq that he purportedly visited after crossing illegally into Iraq but denied ever visiting Baghdad. When referred to his past documentary evidence about multiple visits to Baghdad,[112] the Applicant insisted: ‘I have not been to Baghdad’.
(s)The Applicant said the fraudulent Iranian passport he obtained from the smuggler in Iran was checked twice on departure from Tehran International Airport, during his transit through Dubai, Malaysia, and on arrival in Indonesia. He reported no difficulty crossing international borders. When put by Mr Zhang that this suggested he possessed a genuine Iranian passport, he responded: ‘I’m not sure. It was arranged by the smuggler’. When asked what happened to this passport, he responded: ‘I destroyed it on the boat to Australia – I tore it up and threw it into the sea’. When referred to his claim on arrival in Australia that the passport ‘was taken by the smuggler’,[113] the Applicant denied making that claim. He agreed that the signature on the record in which this claim is recorded is his,[114] and that an interpreter declaration was also included, but claimed: ‘I didn’t understand English’. When asked whether he possibly kept rather than destroyed a passport that enabled him to pass through three different countries unhindered, the Applicant responded: ‘That’s your elaboration’.
(t)When asked why he did not obtain statements from people in Iran who knew him best, like his mother, siblings, and the close friend he left his white card with, the Applicant said his mother and eldest sister were unwell, and there was no one who could certify statements he obtained in Iran.
(u)It was put directly to the Applicant that given the inconsistencies in his evidence, he was either a citizen of Iran or Iraq rather than a stateless and undocumented person, which he rejected.
[106] Exhibit R1, 152 [Q7].
[107] Ibid 161-162.
[108] Exhibit A1, 3 [19]-[20].
[109] Ibid 316 [7].
[110] Exhibit R2, Line 1710.
[111] Exhibit R1 316 [8].
[112] Exhibit R2, Line 1215.
[113] Exhibit R1, 245 [Q29].
[114] Ibid 253.
Evidence of Applicant’s counsellor at Foundation House

The Applicant’s counsellor from Foundation House gave oral evidence and was cross-examined. The Tribunal has also considered the counsellor’s letter dated 23 March 2021.[115]
[115] Exhibit A2.
The counsellor said the Applicant was referred to Foundation House in 2019 by a general practitioner and had presented with issues relating to detention, torture, and trauma by Iranian authorities. He said this was the reason for the Applicant’s escape from Iran and resulted in symptomology to the present day that included nightmares. When asked how long the Applicant was detained for in Iran, the counsellor responded:
Again it was not, um, that question wasn’t, um, have to refer back to my file.
The counsellor said he ‘wasn’t aware’ there was no other evidence apart from the Applicant’s self-reported claims about being detained and tortured by Iranian authorities. When asked whether he knew anything else about the Applicant’s life in Iran the counsellor responded:
We don’t delve too much into the Applicant’s life in Iran, other than reported torture and trauma experience and the impact of that experience on their functioning in Australia.
When asked if the source of the torture and trauma narrative conveyed to him was solely from the Applicant, the counsellor claimed it was ‘mostly’ from the Applicant. When asked to clarify where else these claims originated from, the counsellor thought the torture reference may also have been included in the general practitioner’s referral:
Well…the GP, the information, the referral, indicating that the client needs help because of, the reason for him to refer to Foundation House is because we are a torture and trauma service.
The following exchange then occurred:
Senior Member: Did the GP say anything about torture and trauma in the referral?
Counsellor: I have to go back into that referral document. It’s not in front of me.
Senior Member: Do you have it easily accessible?
Counsellor: I could have a look, if you allow me?
Senior Member: Yes please.
…
Counsellor: I’ve just looked into some of the documents that are readily available, so the information sorry-the GP, it was the (indistinct) information that I gathered from.
Senior Member: I’m sorry, say that again?
Counsellor: So I said it’s mostly from his self-reported, um so I’ve just looked at the referral from his GP, it’s very brief and generic.
Senior Member: Alright. If the referral from the GP is very brief and generic, then is it fair to say that rather than the claims of detention, maltreatment, and abuse by Iranian authorities being mostly based on the Applicant’s self-represented claims, it’s entirely based on his self-reported claims?
Counsellor: Yes.
Senior Member: So if I can summarise, you are providing counselling on approximately a weekly basis for the Applicant, on the premise that he was detained in custody by Iranian authorities for an unknown period, at an unknown time, and he was mistreated by torture and other forms of abuse, immediately following which he escaped to Australia. Have I summarised that correctly?
Counsellor: Um, there’s a bit that’s missing…the torture and trauma experience is one aspect, but the current presentation of the client is what we treat on, that the client was presenting to us, with nightmares and flashbacks, which is related to his past experience. The lack of sleep, which also relate to his detention experience in Christmas Island, and the boat journey, so the traumatic experience relates to both the detention plus the journey and the detention in Christmas Island, also his experience of readjustment here, so we work around symptoms and presentations that affect the person’s functioning throughout their experience.
Senior Member: Alright. Let me see if I can capture that a little more thoroughly. You are treating the Applicant for nightmares and other symptomology, including…providing counselling for several years now to the Applicant, in relation to nightmares and…loss of sleep, that relates to his self-reported claims to you about being detained in custody, by Iranian authorities for an unknown period and at an unknown time, where he was tortured, abused and otherwise mistreated, followed by which he escaped to Australia and that your treatment and counselling of him relates to both that torture and abuse and also the boat journey, detention and readjustment in Australia, have I got it right now?
Counsellor: Yes.
The counsellor said he noticed a ‘dramatic change’ in the Applicant’s functioning since a minor stroke, which diminished his engagement and lowered his concentration, adding to his anxiety and depressive symptoms. When asked if he had any expertise diagnosing psychological conditions or the changes and symptoms he referred to, the counsellor agreed he did not. There was no evidence of expert testing by the counsellor or other expert evidence to corroborate claims made at the hearing about the Applicant’s diminished memory because of a purported assault, minor stroke, or MS diagnosis. During the approximately day-and-a-half the Applicant gave evidence, the Tribunal observed him giving extensive and extemporaneous answers. The Applicant did experience some physical discomfort, which required a brief adjournment, following which the Tribunal invited him to stand up, sit down, or move around whenever required to feel comfortable.
Iraqi Official Gazette & IDBS Identity Analysis Report: Feyli Kurd Cohort
The Respondent tendered a document into evidence titled ‘Iraqi Official Gazette Issue 4019,’ which was dated 7 March 2006 and stated at Article 3 that a ‘person shall be considered Iraqi’ if they are born to an Iraqi father or an Iraqi mother.[116] The Tribunal has also considered the IDBS Identity Analysis document dated 11 July 2016.[117]
[116] Exhibit R2, 428.
[117] Ibid 445-475.
Country Report - Iran
The Tribunal has considered a Country Report for Iran dated 14 April 2020, published by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (“DFAT”). This is considered an authoritative source of reliable information. In relation to birth certificates, identity cards, and Faili Kurds, the DFAT Report states at paragraphs 3.25 – 3.26 and 5.32 – 5.37:
Faili / Feyli / Iraqi Kurds
…
3.25 Iran recognises many (but not all) Faili Kurds as refugees. Those Faili Kurds registered as refugees, like all other registered refugees, are entitled to government services and other rights under the Amayesh system. In contrast, undocumented Faili Kurds are not legally entitled to work, access government services or obtain birth, death and marriage certificates (see Refugees and Undocumented Afghans). Many Faili Kurd refugees returned to Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003 and had their Iraqi citizenship reinstated (the Iraqi Nationality Law, adopted in 2006, repealed Decree No. 666 and stipulated that all persons de-naturalised by the former government have their Iraqi citizenship restored). DFAT is unable to verify how many Faili Kurd refugees have returned to Iraq from Iran.
3.26 Faili Kurd refugees with paternal Iranian ancestry are eligible for Iranian citizenship. Reports suggest that, while many Faili Kurd refugees have applied, only a small number have succeeded in obtaining Iranian citizenship, due to the lengthy and complicated process and the high costs involved (this is also true for applications for Iranian citizenship from other groups, including those who have married Iranians or resided in-country for generations). Other Faili Kurds have not applied for naturalisation because they do not have the required family members in Iran to prove their Iranian ancestry. Faili Kurds who are citizens of Iran enjoy the same rights as other Iranians. DFAT is not aware of specific instances whereby authorities have singled out Faili Kurds for mistreatment, regardless of the category to which they belong.
…
5.30 International observers report that Iranian authorities have little interest in prosecuting failed asylum seekers for activities conducted outside Iran, including in relation to protection claims. This includes posting social media comments critical of the government (heavy Internet filtering means most Iranians will never see them), protesting outside an Iranian diplomatic mission, converting to Christianity or engaging in LGBTI activities. In such cases, the risk profile for the individual will be the same as for any other person in Iran within that category. Those with an existing high profile may face a higher risk of coming to official attention on return to Iran, particularly political activists. The treatment of returnees, including failed asylum seekers, depends on the returnees’ profile before departing Iran and their actions on return. According to local sources, the greatest challenge facing failed asylum seekers on return is reintegrating economically and finding meaningful employment.
5.31 DFAT assesses that, unless they were the subject of adverse official attention prior to departing Iran (e.g. for their political activism), returnees are unlikely to attract attention from the authorities, and face a low risk of monitoring, mistreatment or other forms of official discrimination.
Birth Certificates (Shenasnameh)
5.32 Birth registration is compulsory and must occur within 15 days of birth. Hospitals issue birth certificates for newborn children. The certificate includes the parents’ national identity card and shenasnameh numbers, and, where the parents have settled on one, the newborn’s name. Parents then submit the birth certificate along with their own national identity card or shenasnameh to the local ONOCR, which then issues the child’s shenasnameh (the ONOCR is the sole issuing authority for shenasnameh). Where a child is born at home, a doctor’s note stating all of the particulars of the birth is required for a birth certificate and subsequent issuing of a shenasnameh.
5.33. The shenasnameh itself is a small passport-style book issued to all Iranians. The first page is the inside of the cover page and includes the bearer’s fingerprint. The second page contains a photograph (for bearers over the age of 15), the names of the bearer’s parents, the date and place of birth, the location where the shenasnameh was issued, the name of the issuing officer and a serial number. The third page contains information on the bearer’s marriage(s), divorce(s) and children. The current style of shenasnameh was introduced in 2013.
5.34. To obtain a replacement shenasnameh, a person must attend the national ONOCR and produce an official identity document (such as a passport or national identity card) that confirms their identity. An affidavit of identity must also be presented. The replacement shenasnameh features a diagonal printing across the centre of all pages stating ‘duplicate’, and a new date of issuance.
…
National Identity Cards
5.35 Every permanent resident of Iran over the age of 15 (including non-citizens) must hold a national identity card. National identity cards are compulsory for a range of activities, including obtaining passports and driver’s licences and using bank services. ONOCR initially issues applicants with temporary cards upon receipt of a completed application form, an original copy and photocopy of all pages of the applicant’s shenasnameh, and two photographs. Applicants must present all of this documentation in person at either a local branch of the ONOCR or an Iranian diplomatic mission abroad. Applicants’ fingerprints are also taken. The ONOCR then issues a permanent card with a 10-year validity. The front of the national identity card includes the bearer’s photograph, national identity number, full name, date of birth and shenasnameh number. The reverse features the bearer’s residential numerical code, validity date and the numerical identifier of the issuing office. National identity cards do not specify the bearer’s religion. National identity cards are biometric. The ONOCR is the issuing authority.
5.36 There is no requirement for Iranians to carry either or both of their shenasnameh or national identity card at all times. They are required only when it is necessary to prove identity — not having them will prevent individuals from being able to complete their business. Different offices require different forms of identification: banks require only a national identity card, while notary public offices require both a national identity card and shenasnameh. Iranians generally check with offices ahead of time to see which form of identification is required, or carry both as a means of security.
The Tribunal has also considered a DFAT Country Information Report dated 19 March 2010, which is dated the year prior to the Applicant’s departure from Iran.[118]
CLOSING SUBMISSIONS
[118] Ibid 476-480.
Applicant
In closing submissions Mr Zhang and Ms Vidler relied on their respective Statement of Facts, Issues, and Contentions. Mr Zhang made two relatively minor amendments.
Ms Vidler conceded there were ‘no adequate biometrics’ in this case and the Applicant’s life story therefore assumed greater prominence. She said his identity was accepted during the Refugee Status Assessment in 2011[119] and by the Independent Reviewer who overturned the initial adverse assessment of his protection claims. Ms Vidler also referred to the Applicant being issued a travel document by Australian authorities as suggestive of his identity and statelessness being accepted. She said the ‘Feyli Kurd Cohort’ document provided by the Respondent,[120] which was heavily redacted, should not ‘weigh more heavily than the Applicant’s claims.’ Ms Vidler asked the rhetorical question ‘if this is not the Applicant, then who is he.’
[119] Ibid 330.
[120] Ibid 445.
Ms Vidler is unaware why the Applicant did not obtain statements from relatives and friends in Iran, believing this may relate to his ‘inability to understand the importance of such documents’. She also characterised the documents he provided from Iran as ‘not fantastic but adequate’ but said no document fraud had been alleged by the Respondent. Ms Vidler said in her experience as a refugee advocate, it was ‘unusual he’d have access to these documents’ but opined that his mother concealing copies of Iraqi identification documents under her clothes ‘makes sense’. Ms Vidler said that some of the things the Applicant told her prior to the hearing were different to his oral evidence and believes this may have resulted from his MS. She has not previously met the Applicant in person but felt this diagnosis ‘affected some of his evidence’.
Ms Vidler submitted that the Applicant’s late production of an Iranian white card to Australian authorities in 2019 should be considered in the context of his identity rather than his character: ‘He has produced it now and I can’t explain why he didn’t produce it in the first instance.’ In terms of the inconsistency about what became of the Iranian passport, Ms Vidler said she did not know how the Applicant lost possession of the passport but thought it was likely ‘a genuine Iranian passport.’ Ms Vidler concluded that although there were ‘discrepancies and problems when comparing documents’, she thought ‘on the whole the question of identity should be decided in the Applicant’s favour’.
Respondent
Mr Zhang submitted that due to inconsistencies in the Applicant’s evidence, the Tribunal could not be satisfied of his claimed identity as an undocumented, stateless Faili Kurd. He said it was not for the Tribunal to determine who the Applicant was as Ms Vidler proposed. Mr Zhang said the inconsistencies included his past reliance on different dates of birth, claims he did not write things in his own handwriting, and denying things attributed to him during interviews with interpreter assistance. Mr Zhang said greater weight should be placed on the contemporaneous records than the Applicant’s uncorroborated claims. Mr Zhang submitted that the Applicant was yet to explain why he used the generic birth date 01/01/1975 on arrival in Australia, purportedly because it was ‘simple and easy,’ rather than the birth date 14/02/1975, which was in an Iraqi identity document issued to him after his birth and that he was aware of during his life in Iran.
Mr Zhang said the Applicant’s evidence about his white card was unreliable because he consistently claimed it was taken from him by Iranian authorities in 2006 without replacement. The Applicant’s evidence about who he left this white card with prior to departure from Iran, and who sent it to him in Australia, was also inconsistent. Mr Zhang contended that the Applicant’s past failure to declare the existence of this card, despite multiple opportunities, undermined his identity claims as an undocumented Faili Kurd, and therefore his protection claims. If his current evidence was accepted, the Applicant possessed and used a white card acceptable to Iranian authorities until departing Iran. Mr Zhang said the Applicant was also yet to satisfactorily explain why this card was only provided in 2019, many years after his arrival in Australia.
Mr Zhang said the Applicant’s oral evidence about never previously attempting to regain his Iraqi citizenship, undermined the veracity of past claims in Statutory Declarations and to Departmental officials that he did so on multiple occasions. Mr Zhang also referred to the inconsistency in the Applicant’s claims about what happened to the purportedly fake Iranian passport he used to travel across three international borders. Similarly, his claims about political involvement in Iran have varied over time. Mr Zhang said although these inconsistencies may be seen as relatively minor in isolation, they were collectively significant. Finally, Mr Zhang said no weight should be placed on the evidence of the Foundation House counsellor, who relied entirely on the Applicant’s self-reported claims. This included claims about arrest and torture by Iranian authorities, which had never previously been made by the Applicant or his representatives. Moreover, the counsellor’s opinions were not supported by relevant expert qualifications or testing.
TRIBUNAL CONSIDERATION
Biometric information
The Tribunal accepts Ms Vidler’s submission that there are ‘no adequate biometrics’ probative to the Applicant’s identity. Although there are facial images on the copies of the Iraqi citizenship cards and a ‘Kurdish Organisation’ identity card the Applicant provided,[121] these are dated, of poor quality, and the only evidence about the identity of people in these photographs is from the Applicant himself. His mother, five siblings, and a close friend who live in Iran, did not provide statements, and were not called as witnesses. Moreover, the veracity of the Iraqi citizenship cards is brought into question by the Applicant’s claims that the information about his mother’s Iraqi origin and place of birth (Baghdad), is incorrect.[122] If the information about his mother’s Iraqi ethnic origin and Iraqi citizenship was accepted, this would appear to enliven the Applicant’s legal right to Iraqi citizenship based on DFAT country information and Iraqi law.[123]
[121] Ibid 308; 310; 315.
[122] Ibid 307; 309.
[123] Ibid 428 (Article 3).
Documents
The Applicant has never produced originals of any documents from his life in Iraq or Iran. On arrival in Australia in 2011, he claimed he could obtain his birth certificate from family in Iran.[124] In his citizenship application in 2017, however, he stated he could not provide a birth certificate.[125]
[124] Exhibit R1, 245.
[125] Ibid 170-171.
The Applicant told Australian authorities on arrival at Christmas Island that his Iraqi identification / citizenship card was located at his ‘home’ in Iran.[126] He subsequently claimed this was only a copy, which his mother smuggled out of Iraq under her clothes. This is despite previously claiming the family only had the clothes they wore upon being forced to leave Iraq. It remains unclear to the Tribunal, despite the Applicant’s explanations, why he did not similarly disclose the existence of the copy of a white card he now claims to have used in Iran until departing for Australia. The documents provided by the Applicant following submission of his citizenship application in 2017, including in Statutory Declarations, also show that the claim he does ‘not have any records of [his parents’] birth’ is not correct.
[126] Ibid 208 [Q11].

In terms of the value of a white card for undocumented Faili Kurds in Iran, the Tribunal prefers the information in the DFAT Country Report, as an independent and authoritative source of information, to the Applicant’s uncorroborated claims about its negligible value. The Tribunal found the Applicant’s evidence about his family’s ability to undertake business and other activities and travel as undocumented persons unpersuasive. In the absence of any evidence from the Applicant’s brother the Tribunal is unpersuaded his purported marriage to an Iranian citizen has removed many of the challenges of his undocumented status, enabling him to run businesses in the capital Tehran. The Tribunal also does not accept the Applicant’s evidence that his family’s white cards were taken by Iranian officials following a ‘general order,’ and were not replaced, which conflicts with the DFAT country information. If as the Applicant says, white cards were issued by Iranian authorities to ‘know people from a security point of view,’ it is considered highly likely Iranian authorities would ensure broad provision of these cards to undocumented persons within their borders.
The Tribunal found the Applicant’s evidence about who sent him the copy of his white card unpersuasive. He previously claimed it was a friend, but in oral evidence said it was his sister. When challenged, he claimed both sent him documents. There is no evidence from any of the Applicant’s siblings or the friend he referred to about what was sent to him.
The Tribunal notes an Iraqi identification / citizenship card the Applicant claims is his,[127] an electoral observer card dated 28 February 2010,[128] and a Free Kurdish Organisation identification card,[129] are in different names to that which he says his family adopted upon arrival in Iran thirty years earlier. The only evidence about these name changes and why he continued to use a different name in 2010, are from the Applicant himself.
Life Story
[127] Ibid 307.
[128] Ibid 311.
[129] Ibid 314.
Date of birth
There are several dates of birth for the Applicant across the evidence. This includes 3/1975, 9 December 1975, 14/2/1975, 22 May 1974, and 01/01/1975.[130] The Tribunal found his explanation about picking 01/01/1975 on arrival in Australia because it was ‘simple and easy’, to be unpersuasive. It is noteworthy the Applicant provided two telephone numbers for his brother and sister in Iran upon arrival at Christmas Island[131] and stated he remained in contact with family members over the years. It remains puzzling why he would rely on a generic date of birth when a more precise date of birth was available to him in a document issued proximate to his birth in Iraq. The Tribunal is also unpersuaded by the Applicant’s claim during oral evidence that the ‘3’ in ‘3/1975’ which is a form he completed in his own language on arrival in Australia, is ‘not in [his] handwriting’. Although he subsequently agreed it was, this is one of several examples where the Applicant’s axiomatic response during cross-examination was either to deny or insist that both his original and inconsistent evidence could be correct.
[130] Exhibit A1, 2 [8]-[13].
[131] Exhibit R1, 195 [Q10]; 210 [Q24].
The Tribunal found the Applicant’s claim that he first asked his mother in 2019 or 2020 about his complete date of birth, to be unpersuasive. His ticking of the ‘No’ box in response to the question on his citizenship application: ‘Have you ever had a different date of birth to the one shown at Q6’,[132] is clearly incorrect.
[132] Exhibit R1, 152 [Q7].
Other inconsistencies
There are multiple inconsistencies in the Applicant’s life story since arriving in Australia, which give rise to concerns about the veracity of his identity claim as a stateless and undocumented Faili Kurd. These include:
(a) Claims that his mother’s Iraqi origins and place of birth as Baghdad on Iraqi-issued identity / citizenship cards is incorrect. If that information were correct, the Applicant appears entitled to Iraq citizenship.[133]
[133] Ibid 428 [Article 3].
(b) The Applicant has previously claimed in a Statutory Declaration that Iraqi authorities told him his ‘Iraqi nationality had been declined’.[134] He also stated during an interview with immigration authorities in 2011 that he previously returned to Iraq to restore his citizenship and passport rights.[135] At the hearing he denied saying that during interviews or ever applying to have his Iraqi citizenship restored. The Tribunal prefers the evidence in the contemporaneous interview records and the Applicant’s own Statutory Declaration to his current evidence. The Tribunal rejects the Applicant’s explanation that a reason why he could not have applied for Iraqi citizenship in the past is because ‘there was no Iraqi Government’. That claim is factually incorrect.
[134] Ibid 316 [7].
[135] Exhibit R2, Line 1710.
(c)   The Applicant submitted in April 2011 that he lived ‘without a white card since 2006’ and suffered ‘pervasive discrimination amounting to persecution’ because of ‘no documents,’ causing him to risk ‘coming to the attention of the Iranian authorities whilst engaging in conduct to ensure his survival’.[136] These claims stand in stark contrast to his subsequent production of an Iranian white card to Australian authorities in 2019, which he says is a copy of one previously issued to him, which was acceptable to Iranian authorities and he used until his departure for Australia. He also claimed to use an identification card from his boxing club in Iran, linked to his status as an Olympic standard boxer. The Tribunal does not accept the Applicant’s identity claim that he was ‘undocumented’ in Iran from 2006 until his departure for Australia.
[136] Ibid 295.
(d) The Applicant’s past evidence about travel constraints without a white card is contradicted by his ability to cross into Iraq on multiple occasions and his brother’s self-employed business activities in Tehran. The Applicant has previously stated he travelled to Baghdad on several occasions for periods of up to a month, to pursue his citizenship rights and research ‘options for getting back [his family’s] confiscated properties…[he]…made numerous attempts to assert rights in Iraq to regain family property.’[137] He is previously recorded as stating he secured the services of a lawyer for this purpose[138] and also obtained a ‘Personal card for Free Faili Kurdish Organisation…when he visited Iraq’.[139] In his oral evidence at the present hearing, however, the Applicant denied ever travelling to Iraq since 1980. When challenged, he changed his evidence to say he travelled to several regional towns along the porous land border between Iran and Iraq, but never to Baghdad. The Tribunal rejects the Applicant’s claim that because his family’s former ‘property is in Baghdad…you can just walk there.’ Open-source information discloses that the approximate distance between Ilam Province Iran and Baghdad Iraq exceeds 300km if traveling by vehicle.
[137] Ibid 233; 316 [6]; 297.
[138] Ibid 363.
[139] Ibid 294.
(e) The Applicant stated in his Protection Visa application he never travelled outside of Iran prior to his journey to Australia.[140] This is untrue given past multiple visits to Iraq.
[140] Ibid 406 [Q34].
(f)    The Applicant’s past evidence about what he saw at his family’s former home in Baghdad is inconsistent and implausible. He stated in one Statutory Declaration he personally observed it had become ‘an office for the Mahdi Army a Shia fanatical group’.[141] In his evidence to the Independent Reviewer, however, he claimed the house was ‘occupied by members of Saddam Hussein’s Hezbe Bass/Baasi’. The suggestion that elements of the ‘fanatical’ Shi’a Sadrist movement,[142] centred in Southern Iraq, would establish an office in a relatively well-to-do Baghdad suburb, are considered fanciful based on the Tribunal’s personal knowledge of these issues.
(g) Evidence during the hearing from a Foundation House counsellor disclosed that the Applicant has received approximately four years of torture and trauma counselling, premised on his past detention and torture by Iranian authorities. Neither the Applicant nor his representatives have previously made that claim. His Refugee Status Assessment instead noted: ‘He has not stated he has ever been placed in detention or suffered other adverse treatment from any Iranian authorities’.[143] In terms of purported Etela’at approaches to the Applicant, his previous representations are that: ‘they sought to persuade him rather than intimidate him’. The Applicant has claimed his fears of removal from Australia centre on a ‘continuing risk of persecution’ by Iranian authorities by virtue of his ethnicity, status as an undocumented Faili Kurd, and illegal departure from the country. The Tribunal finds the Applicant’s claims to the Foundation House counsellor about being tortured in Iran to be a relatively recent invention.
(h) The Applicant previously told Australian authorities and an Independent Reviewer that he was the only member of his family involved in political activities in Iran, and his polling booth duties in 2009 were his only political involvement. He also claimed that he did not undertake anti-government activities while living in Iran because he was ‘neutral’ in his views towards the Iranian Government. In his oral evidence, however, the Applicant claimed his father was involved in political activities and since the age of 17 the Applicant had distributed political pamphlets, put up pro-Kurdish posters, and tore down Iranian Government posters.
(i)    The Tribunal is unable to reconcile the inconsistency between the Applicant’s documentary claim that the smuggler took his fake Iranian passport, and his oral claim that he personally tore it up and threw it into the ocean enroute to Australia. The latter was replete with hand gestures during the hearing demonstrating how he did this.
(j)    The Applicant did not disclose to Australian authorities his past contact with Iranian security / intelligence organisations, despite being required to.[144] He now claims to have been approached by Etela’at[145] several times to spy for them but refused.
(k)   The Applicant’s evidence that his family took on a different surname on arrival in Iran and that his father changed his and his sister’s first names is absent any official or family corroboration.
(l)    The Independent Reviewer of the Applicant’s Protection Visa claims found that because ‘the applicant was not officially enrolled in school, he was not issued certificates for the completion of school’. The Independent Reviewer found the Applicant experienced ‘an inability to have a reasonable and appropriate level of education.’[146] At the present hearing the Applicant tendered a certificate of primary school completion and a document from high school stating he was in ‘Third year of literature and humanities’.[147]
(m) The Applicant’s claim in his citizenship application that all his siblings were born in Iraq[148] and claim that this was a mistake by a person whose identity he could not recall, was unpersuasive. Moreover, the claim on this form that three out of five of his siblings had birthdays on 23 September further reinforces the unreliability of some claims, particularly given his evidence that: ‘It may have been a mistake – I don’t know’. Given the Applicant remains in contact with his family in Iran, it remains unclear why he did not better ensure the accuracy of information he provided to the Respondent.
(n) The Tribunal does not accept the Applicant’s evidence that he is unable to source supportive materials like statements from family members in Iran. He communicates regularly with his family and the close friend he claims sent him documents to Australia. There seems no impediment to these people, who would know him best, providing a statement or giving telephone evidence.
[141] Ibid 317 [13].
[142] Mahdi Army or Jaysh Al-Mahdi.
[143] Ibid 344.
[144] Ibid 250 [Q13].
[145] Iranian intelligence service.
[146] Ibid 380 [61].
[147] Exhibit A6; Exhibit A7.
[148] Ibid 161-162.
CONCLUSION
Receiving an Australian certificate of citizenship is a significant privilege that bestows considerable rights and obligations. The strict emphasis on establishing identity as a precondition to granting citizenship, differs substantially from the refugee assessment process, which focusses on the satisfaction of protection criteria. The focus on identity in the former is particularly important because it links to the acquisition of valuable identity documents like an Australian passport and other potential benefits. Australian citizens can also vote, depart / return to Australia at will, and apply for certain public sector jobs. Thorough assessment of identity claims is therefore inexorably linked to the integrity of Australian citizenship.
There is an absence of biometric information and reliable documentation in this matter. The Applicant has never provided original documents, cavils about the accuracy of some information in documents he himself provided, and makes uncorroborated claims about the reason for different names being recorded in documents he provided.
The Applicant’s life story assumes increased prominence but unfortunately contains multiple discrepancies and inconsistencies. The Tribunal is unpersuaded he has been entirely forthright or has made sufficient efforts to source information relevant to his identity that is reasonably expected to exist. This includes statements or oral evidence from family members living in Iran and the friend he previously claimed he left his white card with. Aspects of the Applicant’s evidence, despite his explanations, came across as exaggerated or untrue.
The Applicant’s claim that his family’s white cards were taken by Iranian officials without replacement in 2006 conflicts with DFAT advice about the way Iranian authorities document refugees within their borders. The Tribunal prefers the latter. This is not to suggest that all Faili Kurds in Iran are documented, but simply reflects the reported ‘high rate of documentation amongst the Iraq refugee population in Iran’ and lack of awareness by DFAT of Iranian officials refusing to renew white cards ‘provided that relevant rules have been complied with’. There is no reason disclosed by the Applicant’s evidence why Iranian officials would refuse to provide him and his family with replacement cards after 2006 when the majority of Faili Kurds reportedly received them.
The Applicant’s claim that the last white card he held had an ‘open date’ conflicts with country information that these cards are renewed annually. His lack of knowledge about refugee registration raises concerns about his familiarity with processes that a stateless and undocumented Faili Kurd should know. This is exacerbated by his claim that white cards are of negligible utility, the purported absence of which has not impeded his brother running businesses n Tehran, or the Applicant making multiple visits to Baghdad. The Tribunal remains uncertain, despite the Applicant’s explanations, how he was able to provide a copy of his white card, despite previously claiming since 2011 it was taken by Iranian authorities without replacement. His explanation about making a copy of the card prior to it being taken by Iranian authorities, laminating and using it without objection by Iranian authorities, is very recent, was not previously made, and is unpersuasive. Concerns are only exacerbated by the inconsistency of his evidence about who he left it with on departing Iran and who forwarded it to him in Australia,
There are concerning inconsistencies in the Applicant’s life story. This includes inconsistent information about date of birth, and differences in the narrative he has presented during interviews and Statutory Declarations over time. This includes his current denial that he visited Baghdad on multiple occasions, hired a lawyer to try and recover his family’s property interests, and enquired about restoring his Iraqi citizenship. This enlivens concerns about the veracity of his identity claims as an undocumented and stateless person.
The Applicant was assisted by translators on arrival in Australia and the Tribunal does not accept he did not say the things attributed to him in those contemporaneous records. There is also no persuasive expert evidence to support claims his memory may have been diminished by past injury or recent diagnoses.
CONCLUSION
The Tribunal is not satisfied of the Applicant’s identity for the purposes of s24 (3) of the Act.
DECISION
The decision under review is affirmed.

I certify that the preceding 72 (seventy-two) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Senior Member A. Nikolic AM CSC

......................[sgd]..................................................
Associate
Dated: 8 July 2022

Date of hearing: 30 June / 1 July 2022

Advocate for the Applicant

Solicitors for the Applicant

Ms Jill Vidler

Vidler and Associates

Advocate for the Respondent: Mr Alexander Zhang

Solicitors for the Respondent: Clayton Utz

[2022] AATA 2159

8 July 2022

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Natural Justice

Procedural Fairness

Statutory Construction

Standing

Pillar of Identity	Individual Characteristics
Biometrics	Personal identifiers, which include fingerprints, facial images, or a person's signature. Biometrics can be used for comparison, with, for example, facial images held by the Department or other domestic or international agencies.
Documents	Only reliable identity documents can satisfy this pillar. A reliable identity document is issued with robust identity proofing processes along with issuance protocols and security features. Documents contain biodata, or personal information, such as name, date of birth, nationality, and/or citizenship, and may also contain biometric information.
Life Story	A person's life story is a narrative of the events that happened to them from birth to present. Officers should consider the events that happened to the person, and the information and detail correlating to the events. A person's life story may include descriptions of family composition, education, employment, countries of residence, countries visited, social footprint, and online presence.

Date of hearing:	30 June / 1 July 2022
Advocate for the Applicant Solicitors for the Applicant	Ms Jill Vidler Vidler and Associates
Advocate for the Respondent:	Mr Alexander Zhang
Solicitors for the Respondent:	Clayton Utz