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

This case concerned an appeal by Sakhi Zada (the Applicant) against the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs' (the Respondent) decision to refuse his application for Australian citizenship by conferral. The primary basis for the refusal was that the delegate was not satisfied of the Applicant's identity. The Applicant had arrived in Australia as an unauthorised maritime arrival in 2010 and was subsequently granted a protection visa. He applied for citizenship in 2015, providing several Australian-issued identity documents. However, the Department sought further documentary evidence of his identity, leading to the provision of an Afghan driving licence and supporting statutory declarations.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether it was satisfied of the Applicant's identity for the purposes of section 24(3) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth), and whether the Applicant was of good character for the purposes of section 21(2)(h) of the Act. The Respondent contended that there was a lack of documentation predating the Applicant's arrival in Australia, that the Afghan driving licence was obtained through dubious means, and that the Applicant had not exhausted avenues to obtain a replacement Tazkira. The Applicant argued that his identity was established to the best of his ability given his circumstances, that his Afghan driving licence was genuine, and that he had been transparent about how it was obtained.

The Tribunal found that it was not satisfied of the Applicant's identity. While acknowledging that identity can be established in unusual circumstances without traditional documentation, the Tribunal found that the Applicant had not made reasonable efforts to obtain documentary evidence from Afghanistan, particularly regarding a Tazkira and schooling records. The Tribunal also determined that the Afghan driving licence, procured through a "fixer" via unlawful payments, had no probative value in establishing the Applicant's identity because the process by which it was issued had been subverted. Consequently, the prohibition under section 24(3) of the Act applied, and the application could not be approved.

Due to the finding that the Tribunal was not satisfied of the Applicant's identity, it was not necessary to definitively determine the issue of character. However, the Tribunal briefly addressed it, finding that the use of a "fixer" to obtain the driving licence in Afghanistan, in the circumstances the Applicant faced as a Hazara, was not indicative of a lack of good character. The Tribunal was, however, concerned that the Applicant submitted the Afghan driving licence as proof of identity when he should have known it was of no probative value, which it considered fell short of the honesty expected when dealing with the government on citizenship matters. The decision under review was affirmed.