Saguar Shah, an Indian, is one of the 4,000 immigrants who applied for Australian citizenship last year.
Although he met all the requirements for Australian citizenship at the time of his application in December 2012, his application was rejected for one thing he had done after the application had been submitted.
Shah returned to India in March 2014 and did not return to Australia for three years. The Immigration and Border Protection Department rejected his application for naturalization on the grounds that he did not intend to stay in Australia or maintain a close or sustained relationship with Australia.
According to Simmons (Mitch Simmons) of Tern, many applications have been rejected for that reason.
"When people apply for naturalization, it is often thought that this is not a natural matter, so there is no evidence that they intend to live in any other place in Australia." Simons tells SBS news, "In this case, however, they are usually due to a number of family or business reasons for a considerable period of time in areas other than Australia."
Shah told court, an administrative appeal, that he had to stay in India to look after his stroke-paralyzed father and take care of the family business. But the appeal court announced that the original decision was upheld.
Although the number of applications rejected this year was not "public," the Home Office said 4151 applications for naturalization were rejected in 2016-17.
Of these, 1866 failed to pass the citizenship exam. The remaining applications were rejected because they failed to identify themselves, failed to pass police inspections and were involved in extremist groups.
One of the most common reasons for rejection, Simmons said, was the failure to pass a personality inspection and to be unable to prove identity.
But he said naturalization is easier than applying for a visa. "the government's current approach to citizenship is that they see it as their last chance to decide whether they want this person to stay in Australia, because once they join Australia, It's hard to undo it again. "
Traffic violations are bad.
Last year Kumar (Ritnesh Kumar), who repeatedly violated traffic rules, filed an appeal against immigration's refusal to apply for citizenship, but lost.
Between December 2007 and March 2015, he repeatedly violated traffic regulations, including running a red light, speeding, driving unlicensed vehicles and suspending driving.
Kumar, a Fijian citizen, was fined $500 by the Dubbo court in May 2010 and suspended for three months for driving an unlicensed vehicle. But he did not disclose the conviction in a citizen application filed in December 2015.
The Immigration Department rejected his application for nationality on the grounds that he was incompetent. The administrative appeal was upheld by court.
Concordia Law's Jacques (Michael Arch) said that while determining whether someone has good character, they will also consider violating traffic rules.
"the nature of the violation, the number of violations, whether anyone is injured or in danger, whether the applicant has honestly disclosed the crime, how long ago the offence took place, and whether the applicant has assumed responsibility for the confession, Truthfully disclosing the previous record in a citizen's application, how the court decides, the amount of the fine, whether or not to pay the fine, etc., will have an impact. "