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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by descent, brought by the applicant, Mr. Smith, against the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. The core of the dispute was the Minister's refusal to approve Mr. Smith's application, based on the assessment that he did not meet the good character requirement stipulated in section 16(2)(c) of the *Australian Citizenship Act*. The case was heard by Deputy President Boyle of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant, Mr. Smith, satisfied the "good character" requirement under section 16(2)(c) of the *Australian Citizenship Act*. This section mandates that for individuals aged 18 or over who are or have ever been a national or citizen of any country, the Minister must be satisfied of their good character at the time of the decision on the application. The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr. Smith's history, particularly his extensive and serious offending record, precluded him from being considered a person of good character for the purposes of citizenship by descent.

Deputy President Boyle's reasoning focused on the applicant's criminal history, which was presented as evidence. Despite submissions and supporting documents from the applicant, including a letter from an AOD Counsellor, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr. Smith demonstrated good character. The Tribunal applied the legislative framework of section 16(2)(c) of the Act, which requires the Minister to be satisfied of an applicant's good character. Given the applicant's past offending, the Tribunal concluded that this threshold of satisfaction had not been met.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Minister's delegate dated 15 June 2021 to refuse the applicant's application for Australian citizenship by descent. The refusal was upheld on the basis that the applicant did not meet the eligibility requirements, specifically the good character criterion under section 16(2)(c) of the Act.