WHHK and Minister for Foreign Affairs

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) reviewed a decision by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to cancel the passport of the applicant, identified as WHHK. The dispute arose from evidence suggesting the applicant had committed child sex offences. The applicant sought the return of his passport primarily for employment purposes, but the Minister's decision was based on a concern that the applicant might engage in conduct that could endanger the health or physical safety of others overseas or constitute an indictable Commonwealth offence.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the evidence presented satisfied the threshold for cancelling a passport under section 14 of the *Australian Passports Act 2005* (Cth). Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess if there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the applicant was likely to engage in conduct that would endanger others or constitute a specified indictable offence. This involved considering the meaning of "likely" in this context, which requires a real, not merely remote, possibility of the conduct occurring.

The Tribunal reasoned that its review task was qualitatively different from the Minister's initial decision, as it had the benefit of detailed, legally tested evidence. It adopted the principle that a suspicion is satisfied if there is a real, and not remote, possibility of the person engaging in the specified conduct. The Tribunal acknowledged that the cancellation of the passport might have negative employment ramifications for the applicant, particularly concerning his career prospects. However, it concluded that the prevention of potential child sex crimes overseas must be given greater weight than these employment impacts.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the Minister's decision to cancel the applicant's passport.