Zaya and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (Citizenship)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of Mr. Kyaw Zaya, who sought review of a delegate's decision to refuse his application for Australian citizenship. The refusal was based on the delegate's finding that Mr. Zaya did not meet the "good character" requirement stipulated in section 21(2)(h) of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007. Mr. Zaya, a Burmese national who arrived in Australia in 1996, had a criminal history revealed by a police check, comprising 14 convictions between 2002 and 2008, primarily for driving offences, including driving without authorisation or while suspended, and driving under the influence of alcohol. He had initially failed to declare these convictions on his citizenship application, attributing this omission to limited English and a belief that the offences were too old to be relevant.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr. Zaya possessed the requisite "good character" for citizenship, considering his past convictions, his explanation for their non-disclosure, and any mitigating circumstances. The Minister contended that while individual offences might not be classified as "serious," the pattern of persistent offending, particularly in relation to driving laws, demonstrated a disregard for the law and was inconsistent with Australian community standards. Mr. Zaya argued that his offences were minor, resulting only in fines, and that he had made efforts to address his issues, including seeking psychiatric help and reducing alcohol consumption.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged that while Mr. Zaya's offences might be considered "minor" in isolation, the persistent nature of his driving offences, including driving under the influence, indicated a general disregard for the law. The Tribunal emphasised that such behaviour is not consistent with Australian community values, citing previous AAT decisions that highlight the seriousness of driving offences due to their potential impact on community safety. The Tribunal found that insufficient time had elapsed since Mr. Zaya's last conviction to demonstrate a sustained period of good character and adherence to the law.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse Mr. Zaya's application for Australian citizenship. However, the Tribunal encouraged Mr. Zaya to reapply at a later stage, indicating that a future application might be successful if he could demonstrate a sustained period of good conduct.