General eligibility > > (2) A person is eligible to become an Australian citizen if the Minister is satisfied that the person: > > ... > > (d) understands the nature of an application under subsection (1); and > > (e) possesses a basic knowledge of the English language; and > > (f) has an adequate knowledge of Australia and of the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship...

3. Section 21(2A) provides that the knowledge requirement is taken to be satisfied 'if and only if' the person undertakes an approved citizenship test.[7]
4. An applicant is eligible to sit an Assisted Test if they have low literacy skills. This is demonstrated by completing at least 400 hours of English language tuition under the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP). Eligibility for an Assisted Test can also be enlivened by a physical or cognitive impairment (whether permanent or temporary), which prevents a person sitting the Standard Test. Section 21(3)(d) of the Act provides:

(3) A person is eligible to become an Australian citizen if the Minister is satisfied the person: > > ... > > (d) has a permanent or enduring physical or mental incapacity, at the time the person made the application, that means the person: > > (i) is not capable of understanding the nature of the application at that time; or > > (ii) is not capable of demonstrating a basic knowledge of the English language at that time; or > > (iii) is not capable of demonstrating an adequate knowledge of Australia and of the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship at that time; and > > ...

5. The Australian Citizenship Policy Statement (Policy) (issued on 27 November 2020) and the Revised Citizenship Procedural Instructions (CPI) guide decision-makers who perform functions and exercise powers under the Act. Citizenship policy is not binding on the Tribunal but can be applied unless it is unlawful or 'there are cogent reasons to the contrary.'[8] The Full Court of the Australian Federal Court has held that the discretion to approve or refuse citizenship is unfettered, and 'not inimical to the adoption of executive policy'.[9] Their Honours concurrently acknowledge, however, that applying such policy can promote consistency in decision-making.
6. Citizenship Procedural Instruction 26 - Australian Citizenship Test (CPI 26) contains policy guidance about how the knowledge requirement is administered. Successful completion of the test requires an applicant to answer at least 75 per cent of 20 multiple choice questions (i.e. 15 out of 20) correctly, and all five Australian values questions correctly. A successful Standard Test result is valid indefinitely. The Federal Court has held that applicants cannot re-sit the test as many times as they wish.[10] Paragraph 6.3 of the CPI states it is open to a decision-maker to refuse citizenship if an applicant continues to fail the test on their third test appointment.[11]
7. Australian Citizenship Procedural Instruction 2 (CPI 2) is titled: Australian Citizenship by Conferral - Permanent or Enduring Physical or Mental Incapacity and provides guidance about assessments under s 21(3) of the Act. In assessing incapacity, cl 3.4 of CPI 2 refers to the need for both key aspects of s 21(3)(d) of the Act to be met. This requires an applicant to not only have a permanent or enduring mental or physical incapacity when making their application, but that this is the direct cause of their inability to satisfy at least one of the knowledge requirements.
8. CPI 2 states at cl 3.4.1 that evidence in support of a claim for mental incapacity requires a supporting letter from a registered health expert as summarised in cl 3.4.1.3:

(a) Psychiatrist who is a fellow of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists; or > > (b) Medical practitioner who is a fellow of the Australian Society for Psychological Medicine; or > > (c) Psychologist who is registered with the Psychology Board of Australia and has a practice endorsement in an area relevant to the claimed mental incapacity. Non-exhaustive examples of psychologists who have a relevant area of practice endorsement are clinical psychologists, forensic psychologists and clinical neuropsychologists; or > > (d) A general practitioner who is a fellow of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and is able to provide a letter based on information they hold from other specialist medical practitioner/s and allied health practitioners who have treated the applicant, or has been treating the applicant for 12 months or more and can provide other credible evidence as to the person's incapacity to underpin and explain the conclusions in the letter.

9. Specialist reports should articulate a clear basis for opinions expressed, including the link between a person's incapacity and inability to satisfy the knowledge requirement. Policy guidance is that exemptions are not lightly given and must be grounded on persuasive evidence.

1. The issue to be determined is whether the Applicant is eligible for Australian citizenship based on either ss 21(2)(d)-(f) or s 21(3)(d).

1. The following documents were tendered into evidence:

(a) Section 37 documents from the Respondent numbering 177 pages;[12] > > (b) Letter from Ms Natasha Matti dated 3 July 2025, with three practice tests attached;[13]

(c) Enrolment Letter dated 23 June 2025 from the AMEP, with attendance records dated between 19 October 2024 to 23 June 2025.[14]

(d) Referral letter dated 13 February 2025 from general practitioner Dr Khalil Alokla 'to whom it may concern';[15]

(e) Referral letter dated 24 June 2025 from Dr Alokla to psychologist Mr Medhat Metri;[16]

(f) Letter dated 2 July 2025 from occupational therapist and mental health clinician Dr Yaser Mohammad;[17] and

(g) Letter dated 29 November 2025 from consultant psychiatrist Dr Wael Wahaib.[18]

1. The Applicant gave oral evidence with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic language. She recounted aspects of her life since arrival in Australia, which includes English studies on arrival and periods of employment. The Applicant said some co-workers spoke Arabic and assisted her with English when required. The last time she worked was about five years ago.
2. More recently the Applicant's study under the AMEP has included grammar and other classes relating to the citizenship test. Two nieces have also helped her prepare for the test.
3. The Applicant said her English is sufficient for basic interactions but not conversations. One of her children routinely accompanies her to appointments and assists with translation. She keeps returning to studies and 'trying hard' to improve her English ability.
4. The Applicant explained her desire to become an Australian citizen as centered on obtaining a passport to visit siblings overseas. When asked why her Iraqi passport could not be renewed, it was submitted by Ms Matti that this is a 'very lengthy' process and can only be done from Iraq. The Applicant has obtained an Australian identity document that permits some travel but claims this does not include Europe where close relatives live.
5. The Applicant recalled obtaining assistance from a community group to complete her citizenship application. When asked by Mr Zhang if she agrees that her test results have improved over time, which include scores of 50, 60, and 75 per cent at her March 2025 appointment,[19] the Applicant replied: 'How is it better if I did not pass'. When asked about a letter from her niece that states she is motivated to learn and achieved 100 per cent on several trial tests, the Applicant responded that after 'many years' it 'has not worked'.
6. The Applicant is aware that citizenship obligations include being law abiding and voting. She recalled learning about 'ANZAC Day and ships coming from Britain' during classes.
7. The Applicant was taken by Mr Zhang through medical records that refer to her suffering adverse mental health relating to difficult life circumstances in Iraq. She first saw general practitioner Dr Alokla in 2024 who referred her to psychiatrist Dr Wahaib. Her medication regime under Dr Wahaib continues to be tested. The Applicant said she also sees Dr Yaser Mohammad and feels better after discussions with her physicians. She does not consider, however, that her mental health is 'getting better'.

1. Ms Matti submitted that the Applicant's mental health conditions affect her ability to satisfy the knowledge requirement. Despite consistent practice, Ms Matti said the Applicant 'learns content but then forgets'. She gave an example of the Applicant writing reminders for appointments but then forgetting where she put these. Ms Matti said the Applicant is now seeing a second psychiatrist in addition to Dr Wahaib.

1. The Tribunal has considered a letter dated 3 July 2025 from Ms Natasha Matti, stating:[20]

I am writing on behalf of my aunty, Sanaa Polo, who is currently undertaking her assisted citizenship examination and interview. > > Sanaa has previously attempted the citizenship test three times without success, and this is now her fourth attempt. Please find attached a medical certificate outlining the reasons for her difficulties. She experiences frequent memory loss, which significantly affects her ability to retain information despite her best efforts. > > Over the past 12 months, Sanaa has been diligently preparing for the test using the Australian Citizenship booklet and attending a weekly program...designed to support applicants studying for...citizenship. While she is able to learn and recall the answers during practice tests, her medical condition hinders her ability to retain this information over time. Despite her dedication and ongoing effort, her memory challenges continue to impact her performance. > > Although Sanaa will become eligible for citizenship automatically when she turns 60...she urgently requires citizenship to apply for an Australian passport and travel overseas. She has not seen her family in 15 years. Her current temporary passport does not permit travel to Europe, where her family resides...In light of these circumstances, we respectfully request that you consider her medical condition and personal situation when determining the outcome of her application if she is unsuccessful in her fourth attempt.

1. The Applicant relies on the following medical evidence:

(a) Referral letter from general practitioner Dr Alokla dated 13 February 2025 that raises memory difficulties and forgetfulness over the previous two years, and states: 'It would be appreciated if you could consider exempting the patient from sitting the citizenship exam'. > > (b) In a subsequent referral letter dated 24 June 2025 to psychologist Mr Medhat Metri,[21] Dr Alokla provides a GP Mental Health Treatment Plan and states, amongst other things, the Applicant is 'depressed ... not motivated ...does not have the desire to socialise ... not coping ... disturbed sleep ...'. Dr Alokla's summary states: > > Appearance and behavior: well groomed and normal behavior > > Speech : normal not pressured > > Mood : observed during interview stable mood > > Affect : appropriate emotions > > Thought form and content: normal thoughts expression and coherent speech > > Perception : Nil illusions, Nil hallucinations > > ... > > Cognition : orientated to time place and person > > Insight : patient has insight to her medical condition > > Please review and provide further management. > > (c) There is no evidence that the referral to Mr Metri was undertaken. > > (d) A letter dated 2 July 2025 from occupational therapist and mental health clinician Dr Yaser Mohammad states he started seeing the Applicant on 28 May 2025 for 'supportive counselling'. Dr Mohammad said she is compliant with 'all aspects of her treatment plan', and 'committed and motivated to attend therapy'. Reference is made to the Applicant's motivation and concentration being affected by 'sleep disturbances', including because of knee pain, which makes it 'hard to focus on many daily activities'. Dr Mohammad refers to 'poor concentration and some short memory loss (sic)' but opines that the Applicant's 'condition would be responsive to a change in circumstances'. Dr Mohammad also states: 'I understand that rather than completing written testing for her citizenship she can have an interview. I would appreciate if the option of an interview could be offered'. > > (e) Psychiatrist Dr Wahaib saw the Applicant on 29 November 2025 and refers to her experiencing: 'limited focussing and concentration, had failed the citizenship test 10 times'. His summary of their consultation includes: > > ... > > Psychotic Symptoms: Nil > > Substances History: Nil > > ... > > Forensic History: Nil. > > Personal, Developmental History: Nil > > Personality Traits: Nil > > Mental State Examination > > ... > > Appearance, Behaviour: Good eye to eye contact, easily got in rapport, speech was normal. > > Mood: was depressed. > > Affect: normal reactive in intensity, appropriate and congruent. > > Though Forms Disorder: NIL > > Though Content Disorder: NIL > > Perception Disorder: NIL > > Insight: Intact > > Judgement: Intact > > (f) Dr Wahaib refers to the need for an 'organic work up', suggests education relevant to the Applicant's mental health issues and prescribes medication.

1. The Applicant's citizenship application was made under the general eligibility criteria using Form 1300t,[22] rather than Form 1290. The latter is used for 'other situations' such as when an applicant is aged 60 or over or claims to have a permanent or enduring incapacity. The Tribunal accepts the Applicant's unchallenged evidence that the form she used was selected by the community centre worker who assisted her.
2. It was not until 17 February 2025, nine months after lodging her citizenship application and unsuccessfully attempting the Standard and Assisted tests multiple times, that the Applicant's niece contacted the Department referring to 'reasons for her difficulties'.[23]
3. The Applicant's medical evidence discloses the following:

(a) Dr Alokla referred in his February 2025 letter to the Applicant telling him about 'difficulty concentrating and occasional confusion', and 'depression which may contribute to memory impairment'. There is no previous reference to memory problems in Dr Alokla's clinical notes between 18 January 2024 and 24 June 2025. There is no evidence Dr Alokla undertook any test or inquiry relevant to memory issues. His June 2025 referral letter to Mr Metri reports 'normal behaviour' and 'stable mood', with 'appropriate emotions', thoughts, expression, cognition, insight, and coherent speech. The GP Mental Health Treatment Plan provided by Dr Alokla makes a provisional diagnosis and refers to 'k10' and 'psycho-education'. The Tribunal is aware that the former is the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) diagnostic tool, often used as a screening methodology. No other cognitive testing appears to have been undertaken. Dr Alokla does not refer to the Applicant as suffering a permanent or enduring mental incapacity when lodging her citizenship application, nor that this renders her incapable of satisfying the knowledge requirement. > > (b) There is no evidence the Applicant saw psychologist Mr Metri after Dr Alokla's June 2025 referral. The Applicant claims she saw Mr Metri some years ago and he was asked to provide a letter about past consultations, but purportedly responded he was 'not qualified' to do so. > > (c) Dr Yaser Mohammad is an occupational and mental health clinician who first saw the Applicant on 28 May 2025. He refers to the Applicant's claims about 'poor concentration and some short memory loss' and observes that her English is 'significantly limited'. Dr Mohamad opines, however, that the Applicant's 'condition would be responsive to a change in circumstances'. > > (d) Dr Wahaib's diagnosis postdates the Applicant's citizenship application by about 18 months. He does not state these conditions were permanent and enduring when lodging her citizenship application, nor that they rendered her incapable of satisfying the knowledge requirement. Dr Wahaib's recommended treatment plan has been in place for about three months and he refers to 'time needed for medicine to start to work'. The Applicant's oral evidence is that a second drug prescribed by Dr Wahaib is currently being trialled.

1. The statutory pathways to citizenship pursued by the Applicant require her to either pass the citizenship test under s 21(2) of the Act or be incapable of satisfying at least one of the elements at ss 21(3)(d)(i)-(iii) because of a permanent or enduring physical or mental incapacity. The available evidence does not establish either.
2. In terms of demonstrating a basic knowledge of English, it is uncontroversial the term 'basic' refers to a minimum requirement. The Applicant has undertaken English language studies since arriving in Australia and built on this somewhat through employment and other community engagement. During the last 16 months she has intensified her efforts under the AMEP to prepare for the citizenship test. This is commendable. Her improving test scores from 30s and 40s in late 2024, to 50, 60, and 75 per cent at her last test appointment on 3 March 2025, suggests an improving ability to retain information relevant to the knowledge requirement. The evidence of her niece about trial test scores of 100 percent is similarly encouraging. That said, the Applicant is yet to pass the citizenship test and there is no statutory discretion for the Tribunal to waive this. She does not satisfy s 21(2) of the Act.
3. The Tribunal accepts the Applicant has been adversely affected by past circumstances in Iraq. Her life since arriving in Australia, however, includes raising her family, employment, and involvement in community activities. She presented during the hearing as an intelligent and motivated person, which is supported by the evidence of others. Her oral evidence reflects an understanding of the citizenship process, some of the obligations and privileges of citizenship, and awareness of a few major events in Australian history. Her mental health appears amenable to treatment and alleviation under a continuing process. The expert opinions she relies upon do not establish a permanent or enduring physical or mental incapacity within the meaning of s 21(3)(d) of the Act when making her citizenship application almost two years ago.
4. It is open for the Applicant to reapply for Australian citizenship at any time - either when she feels better placed to attempt the citizenship test in compliance with s 21(2) of the Act, or to present more persuasive expert evidence under s 21(3)(d).

I certify that the preceding 35 (thirty-five) paragraphs are a true copy of the written reasons for the decision of Senior Member A. Nikolic AM CSC.

[7] This test is established pursuant to a legislative instrument made under s 23A of the Act, currently Australian Citizenship (LIN 25/126: Approval of a Citizenship Test) Determination 2025 (Cth). (Determination)

[8] Re Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (No 2) (1979) 2 ALD 634 at 645.

[9] Minister for Home Affairs v G [2019] FCAFC 79; (2019) 164 ALD 103, 120 [64] - [65], [70].

[10] Minister for Home Affairs v Zadeh (No 2) [2018] FCA 1828.

[14] Exhibit A2. It is uncontroversial the Applicant has undertaken sufficient hours under the AMEP to qualify for an assisted citizenship test.

[19] Exhibit R1, 65, 74, 87, 94, 105, 110-112. Albeit the Applicant did not answer all values questions correctly and therefore failed the test where she achieved the 75 per cent result.