Ramos Hernandez and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship)

This matter concerned an application by Mr. Ramos Hernandez (the Applicant) to review a decision by the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to revoke his Australian citizenship. The revocation was based on the Applicant's convictions for maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child. The Applicant contended that the offending conduct did not occur prior to his citizenship conferral, which would impact the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The case was heard by Theodore Tavoularis SM.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Applicant's offending conduct, specifically the unlawful sexual relationship with a child, occurred before his Australian citizenship was granted on 2 April 1997, thereby establishing the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Additionally, the Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant had established himself as a person of good character and whether it would be contrary to the public interest for him to continue to hold Australian citizenship, given his convictions.

The Tribunal applied the principles established in *Hogan v Hinch* regarding the interpretation of "public interest" in statutory contexts, noting that it is derived from the subject matter, scope, and purpose of the enactment and not idiosyncratic notions. The Tribunal affirmed the axiom that it is axiomatic that a person granted citizenship should be of good character and continue to be so, and that engaging in criminal conduct incompatible with good character would be contrary to the public interest. The Tribunal found that the evidence, including the victim's impact statement and the sentencing judge's findings, strongly indicated that at least one unlawful act occurred prior to 2 April 1997, satisfying the jurisdictional threshold. The Tribunal also concluded that the Applicant's conduct, described as a "repugnant crime" that inflicted "grievous and lifelong injury," demonstrated a lack of good character, making it contrary to the public interest for him to retain Australian citizenship.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to revoke the Applicant's Australian citizenship.