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

This matter concerned an application for Australian citizenship by conferral by Mr Mohamed Omar Warsame, which was refused by the Minister's delegate on the grounds that Mr Warsame was not of good character. The delegate's decision was based on Mr Warsame having presented counterfeit school records from Kenya during a citizenship interview and providing false and misleading information regarding the whereabouts of his biological parents. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Warsame satisfied the good character requirement under section 21(2)(h) of the *Australian Citizenship Act 2007* (Cth).

The Tribunal considered the principles outlined in CPI 15 regarding the assessment of good character, which mandates a flexible and contextual approach, weighing all relevant factors. These factors include an applicant's family life, employment, tax history, the time elapsed since any offending, expressions of remorse, and any mitigating circumstances. Mr Warsame provided a statutory declaration detailing his experiences during the civil war in Somalia, his displacement to Kenya as a refugee, and the circumstances surrounding his educational documentation. He explained that due to the conflict, he was left in the care of an adoptive mother and that his educational certificates were obtained through a process involving payment to teachers to pass an exam, as he had fled war and hardship. He also clarified the reasons for not reuniting with his biological parents, citing concerns about forced recruitment by militant factions.

The Tribunal weighed Mr Warsame's explanation against the initial concerns raised by the delegate. It noted that a previous hearing had satisfied the Tribunal of Mr Warsame's identity. Considering the entirety of the evidence, including the difficult circumstances of his upbringing and the explanations provided in his statutory declaration, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Warsame was of good character at the time of the decision. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and remitted the matter for reconsideration, directing that Mr Warsame satisfied the good character requirement.