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

[2020] AATA 5872

Saifi and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Citizenship) [2020] AATA 5872 (27 November 2020)

Division:                  GENERAL DIVISION

File Number:           2020/2088

Re:  Sediqa Saifi

APPLICANT

And  Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal:  Mr A Maryniak QC, Member

Date of decision:                   27 November 2020 Date of written reasons: 17 December 2020 Place:  Melbourne

For the reasons given orally at the conclusion of the hearing of this matter, the Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

.........................[sgd]...............................................

Mr A Maryniak QC, Member

Catchwords

CITIZENSHIP – refusal of approval for Australian citizenship by conferral – whether Applicant has satisfied paragraphs 21(2)(d), (e), (f) of Australian Citizenship Act – successful completion of citizenship test requirement – decision affirmed

Legislation

Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth)

Cases

Khoshaba v Minister of Immigration and Border Protection [2018] AATA 1829

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr A Maryniak QC, Member 17 December 2020

1.At the conclusion of the hearing of this matter, the terms of the decision and the reasons thereof were stated orally.

2.The oral reasons for the decision have been transcribed by Epiq Australia Pty Ltd. Whereas those oral reasons may reflect the inelegance of an extempore decision, they are in fact the reasons for the said decision.

3.An extract of the said transcript is Annexure “A” hereunto and furnished to the Applicant and to the Respondent.

I certify that the following 4 (four) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision of Mr A. Maryniak QC, Member

......[sgd]............................................................

Associate

Dated: 17 December 2020

Dateofhearing:	27 November 2020
TheApplicant:	By telephone
AdvocatefortheRespondent:	Lenny Leerdam
SolicitorsfortheRespondent:	MILLS OAKLEY LAWYERS

ANNEXURE A EXTRACT OF TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

1.MEMBER: This is an application seeking review of a decision of the delegate of the respondent dated 31 March 2020, which refused the grant of Australian citizenship to the applicant. The Parliament of Australia, through the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, has set out certain requirements to determine the eligibility to become an Australian citizen. By way of background, the applicant was born in Afghanistan on 12 February 1983 and arrived in Australia on 17 July 2013 and on 20 November 2017, the applicant applied for Australian citizenship.

2.The Tribunal has considered the evidence, including the documentary evidence, before it and the written and oral submissions of the respondent and the oral evidence of the applicant. It is clear on the evidence that the applicant has failed the citizenship test on eight occasions through three appointments on 5 July 2019, 2 December 2019 and 27 February 2020. As a consequence, on 31 March 2020, the applicant was notified that her application for Australian citizenship would be refused. The relevant sections of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, the Act, are sections 21, 24 and in particular, 24(1A) which provides:

The Minister must not approve the person becoming an Australian citizen unless the person is eligible to become an Australian citizenship under subsection 21(2)...

3.The eligibility requirements set out in subsection 21(2) is that the person must understand the nature of an application for Australian citizenship and possess a basic knowledge of the English language and have an adequate of Australia and importantly, of the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship. Subsection 21(2A) provides that 21(2)(d), (e) and (f) of subsection 21(2) are only satisfied if the Minister is satisfied that the person has sat and successfully completed a citizenship test. The citizenship policy, in particular chapter 7 is consistent with this approach in the legislation.

4.The Tribunal, having found that the applicant has not successfully completed the citizenship test, the Tribunal finds that the applicant does not satisfy subsection 21(2), in particular, subsection (d), (e) and (f) of the Act, at the time of the delegate’s decision. Consistent with the authority of Khoshaba v Minister of Immigration and Border Protection [2018] AATA 1829, the Tribunal affirms the delegate’s decision as the correct and preferable decision.