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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral made by Mr. Selamat. A delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs refused the application on the grounds that Mr. Selamat was not of good character. Mr. Selamat sought review of this decision before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr. Selamat was of good character for the purposes of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth). This involved assessing whether the Tribunal had an affirmative belief that Mr. Selamat was of good character at the date of the Tribunal's decision, considering his criminal offending, including a domestic violence offence, which occurred after his citizenship application was lodged.

The Tribunal considered evidence from various individuals, including neighbours, friends, and community leaders, who generally described Mr. Selamat positively as a hard-working family man contributing to the community. However, the Tribunal noted that some of this evidence was given without full knowledge of Mr. Selamat's criminal convictions. The Tribunal distinguished between "good character" and "good reputation," emphasising that past misconduct, if redeemed by subsequent good conduct, might not preclude a finding of good character. Nevertheless, the Tribunal found that a period of time must pass, and there must be no adverse conduct, before it could be satisfied that Mr. Selamat was of good character.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the application for citizenship. The decision did not affect Mr. Selamat's status as a permanent resident, and he was at liberty to make a future application once a sufficient period had elapsed without adverse conduct.