1420729 (Refugee)

[2017] AATA 1175

1420729 (Refugee) [2017] AATA 1175 (17 July 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1420729

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                  Egypt

MEMBER:Sophia Panagiotidis

DATE:17 July 2017

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicants satisfy s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Statement made on 17 July 2017 at 12:05pm

CATCHWORDS

Refugee – Protection visa – Egypt – Religion – Christian – False charges – Conversion of Muslims – Threats

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 36, 65, 91R(1), 438, 499

Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2

CASES

Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1989) 169 CLR 379

Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependant.

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant the applicants Protection visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicants, who claim to be citizens of Egypt, applied for the visas [in] August 2013 and the delegate refused to grant the visas [in] December 2014.

3. The applicants appeared before the Tribunal on 16 November 2016 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from [Mr A]. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic and English languages.

4. The applicants were represented in relation to the review by their registered migration agent. The representative attended the Tribunal hearing.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

5. The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s.36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s.36(2)(a), (aa), (b), or (c). That is, the applicant is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.

6. Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (together, the Refugees Convention, or the Convention).

7. Australia is a party to the Refugees Convention and generally speaking, has protection obligations in respect of people who are refugees as defined in Article 1 of the Convention. Article 1A(2) relevantly defines a refugee as any person who:

   owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

8. If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s.36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of a protection visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s.36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’).

9. In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.56, made under s.499 of the Act, the Tribunal is required to take account of policy guidelines prepared by the Department of Immigration –PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Complementary Protection Guidelines and PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Refugee Law Guidelines – and any country information assessment prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.

10. The issue in this case is whether Australia has protection obligations towards the applicants. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

    Background

11. The second named applicant applied for an Australian [temporary] visa in 2009 to attend her [sibling]’s wedding; however this was refused [in] March 2009. Both the applicants applied for another [temporary] visa in January 2013 which was granted and they arrived in Australia [in] June 2013 and have not departed since.

    Country of reference

12. The applicants have provided the Department with identity documents including certified copies of their Egyptian passports. The Tribunal accepts that the applicants are citizens of Egypt and have assessed their claims against that country as their country of nationality for the purposes of the Convention as well as the receiving country for the purposes of complementary protection.

13. Based on the evidence presently before it, the Tribunal is not satisfied the applicants have statutory effective protection in any safe third country (pursuant to subsections 36(3)-(5A) of the Act).

    Submissions

14. The applicants’ representative provided the Tribunal with a number of submissions and additional documentary evidence including:

    ·A marriage certificate showing that the second named applicant has married since arriving in Australia. She has married an Australian citizen [in] February 2016.

    ·A letter from [a] general practitioner dated [October] 2016 in relation to the second named applicant who confirmed that he was suffering from longstanding [medical condition]. [The general practitioner] states that his symptoms are not controlled and his [health] is markedly [impaired]. He has referred him to a consultant [specialist] for an opinion and who confirms that the applicant has moderately severe [medical condition] and has adjusted his medication. [The general practitioner] has provided a copy of the report from [the specialist].

    ·An assessment in relation to the care needs of the second named review applicant in April 2017. This shows that the applicant is extremely frail and fully reliant on his [children-in-law] to attend to all activities of daily living excluding personal hygiene.

    ·There was also a copy of a discharge summary from [a hospital] showing that the second named applicant had been admitted [in] January 2017 for [an injury]. This record shows he was also monitored for a number of other health issues whilst he was an in-patient including his [medical conditions].

    ·Country information regarding the current situation of Christians in Egypt from the applicants’ representative which has been considered by the Tribunal:

    ·Why Egypt’s Muslims are bitter towards Coptic Christians.[1]

    [1]

    ·Jacob Wirtschafter in the USA Today on 7 August 2016 Attacks on Christians in Egypt raise alarms.[2]

    [2]

    ·A Christian website, Open Doors which assesses the risk of Christian persecution worldwide and indicates that Egypt is rated 21 out of the 50 most dangerous countries for Christians.[3]

    [3]

    ·A report by CNN Palm Sunday bombings kill dozens at churches in Egypt, dated 9 April 2017[4] by Joe Sterling, Faith Karimi, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Hamdi Alkhshali.

    [4]

    ·A report by Fox News dated 9 April 2017 Palm Sunday attacks: 44 dead, more than 100 injured in church bombings carried out by ISIS in Egypt.[5]

    [5]

    ·An article published on 25 February 2017 by Premier Praise UK Coptic Church warns of “alarming” rise in attacks, as Egyptian Christians flee (Alex Williams)[6]

    [6]

    ·A letter from [Pastor B], Senior Pastor, [Church 1], dated [November] 2016 in support of the applicant. He states as follows:

    I [Pastor B] (address provided) and now I am the Senior Pastor at [Church 1] (address supplied) and certify the following:

    ·That I know (the applicant details of date of birth and address supplied). She was a member of [Church 2] in Cairo, Egypt since 1997.

    ·It is known that (the applicant) has been loved and interested to provide the [Ministry 1] service for the poor people in Upper Egypt.

    ·I acknowledge that (the applicant) has been involved at [Ministry 1] since 1998 and this service is provided by [Ministry 2] at [Church 2] in Cairo, Egypt and I also had the opportunity to be involved to evangelise the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the lost as I was also a member of [Ministry 1] until I left Egypt and came to Australia.

    ·All members involved in this ministry are volunteers and the main task for [Ministry 1] is to visit the very poor villages in Upper Egypt to provide them with Spiritual needs, providing them with blankets, clothing, medications and financial needs to the poor people and to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ although there are many difficulties to do so.

    ·I confirm that I know (the applicant) applied for a protection visa to the Australian Government as she faced special circumstances and she applied for the protection visa after she arrived to Australia…(sic)

    ·A submission from the applicant's representative provided to the Tribunal on 11 April 2017.

    ·In relation to the police report from Egypt the Tribunal has referred to the delegate’s decision regarding concern with the police reports. The applicant obtained these documents (from Egypt) while she was in Australia. She was not involved in the process (apart from requesting the documents). The Department did not confirm whether the police report that was supplied with stamps was not a proper document. It cannot exclude the possibility that the document is genuine.

    ·The evidence provided by both applicants is consistent. They are seeking procedural fairness based on the fact that many other cases from Egypt with the same issues have been given more weight based on verbal evidence and credibility and they would be grateful if the Tribunal concludes that it gives neither negative nor positive weight to the report submitted.

    ·It is crime in Egyptian law to strive to alter any legal documents, including police reports and both applicants would never be involved in such a process.

    ·In relation to the current situation in Egypt Christians in Egypt are no better under the present regime and are continuing to suffer persecution. Similar country information to that referred to above was included in this submission.

    ·To conclude that the situation of Christians in Egypt has improved shows a lack of understanding as there is such hatred against Christians and the situation of Christians has not improved in the absence of any genuine attempts to take constitutional steps and legal action against people who attack Christians. The following is also posited:

    -    Has the regime introduced new measures to make Muslims and Christians equal regarding their rights and obligations in law?

    -    The building of new churches requires presidential permission and there are still restrictions on these.

    -    Under the new government, maintenance work in any church cannot go ahead without fear of being attacked or destroyed not only by Muslim extremists, but also ordinary Muslims who are of the view that Christians are the main enemy and easy targets.

    -    Have the number of attacks against Christians and their churches been eliminated or reduced compared to previous eras?

    -    Has Egypt’s rating as the 22^nd country where Christians suffer persecution changed?

    -    Has there been, over the period of three years since the new government was elected, a single article or report to contradict the above and support the view of the delegate that Christians in Egypt are better off under the current regime?

    ·Any regime in Egypt will not change the misrule and situation of Christians in Egypt because the people of that country do not want that. Over 30 years of dictatorship there have been reports of concern concerning Christians and denying any persecution of attacks against them. Even though the previous regime has gone, Christians have suffered a number of attacks and they cannot rely on hope and talk and the facts. In Egypt it is impossible in a country where 50 percent of the population is illiterate and the conditions are getting worse with the government struggling to handle the situation. Therefore in this climate and in the foreseeable future the situation of Christians will not get better.

    ·It is important to understand the current political climate in Egypt and the restricted procedures followed by the regime to limit freedom of speech and the fear of being charged for issuing material against the national peace or similar charges that may lead to a jail sentence. Therefore obtaining a letter from [the person] who was responsible for [Ministry 1] service has been made but they have been informed verbally that such a letter in this climate would not be easy to obtain. Accordingly it was important to find a credible witness (to confirm the applicant's involvement) and a letter has been provided by [Pastor B] from [Church 1] who was a member of the same church Egypt prior to his arrival in Australia and who had also been involved in the same group. He confirms that the applicant had been involved with the [Ministry 1] service with him and he is aware of her claims of protection and has given his full support.

    ·The second named applicant is a devoted Christian who has been involved for most of her life in serving Christianity and supporting people who are in desperate need and in particular in areas located in Upper Egypt and regional areas. She is a credible witness. In a country like Egypt, there are credible reports that Christians in such areas suffer and the nature of the service in which the applicant has been involved faces many problems and life threatening conditions. The second named applicant has confirmed that his daughter was detained and questioned by the Egyptian police. He has also confirmed her service with the [Church 2].

    ·Further a negative decision would disadvantage the second named applicant who suffers from [a medical condition] and his treatment for this Egypt was not dealt with properly and since being treated in Australia, he has started to show signs of improvement. The second named applicant has married an Australian citizen since her arrival in Australia and she and her father live with her husband. He is aware of all her circumstances and the option of all of them moving to Egypt is impossible.

    ·On 25 May 2017 the Tribunal received a further submission outlining the applicants’ difficulty in obtaining a letter of support from the leader and founder of the [Ministry 1] group due to the restrictions imposed on any letters of support to any person seeking asylum from Egypt due to severe and harsh penalties by the Egyptian government. The person has offered his support in an indirect way so as not to trigger any attention or penalty from the government. He has provided photographs of the [Ministry 1] group members visiting disadvantaged places in Egypt where the group, including the applicant had been doing their voluntary activities. The [Ministry 1] group has been working under the umbrella of [Ministry 2] and they have accessed the [Ministry 2 social media] page and the applicant's [social media] page. This shows the applicant has been a member of this group since 2010. The links to these have been provided.

    Assessment of claims

15. The applicants’ claims as outlined at the hearing are as follows and mainly concern the primary review applicant although the second named applicant has also claimed to fear returning to Egypt due to his religion:

    (a)  The second named applicant[7] is now married, since being in Australia ([November] 2015) and a Christian. Although baptised into the Coptic Orthodox Church she has been attending Catholic services from 1997 to 2013.

    [7] The Tribunal will refer to her as “the applicant” as the claims for a protection visa mainly concern her

    (b)  Since 1999 she has volunteered for a Catholic charitable outreach program [Church 2] in Cairo known as [name] Services in Egypt which provides material aid and financial assistance to poor Christians in various locations in Egypt.

    (c)  She is a member of [Church 2] and participated in a [name] Service in [Town 1] in Al Minya in March 2013. The group’s bus was prevented from entering the town by a mob of angry Muslims which had been organised by [Sheikh C].

    (d)  She made a complaint to the [Town 1] police about the blockade and named [Sheikh C] as the organiser.

    (e)  She was later summonsed to the police headquarters in [Town 1]. She and her father travelled down by train [in] April 2013 and they were attacked by [Sheikh C] and two or three other men outside the train station soon after their arrival. They managed to get away and got into a taxi with the help of passers-by and they went to the hospital and reported the attack at the police desk.

    (f)    After treatment at the hospital, they attended the police headquarters and she found that she had been summonsed because a counter claim had been made by [Sheikh C] accusing her of trying to convert Muslims in violation of Egyptian law. She was released on [bail] and allowed to return to Cairo.

    (g)  Several weeks later she was advised by the [prosecutor’s directorate] they were going to be proceeding with charges against her.

    (h)  She claims she will not receive a fair trial in Egypt due to the power of the Muslim Brotherhood, her Christianity and her past experience of the judiciary. This is because she had previously [fatally injured someone] by accident and she was prosecuted for manslaughter and found guilty and given a custodial sentence. She believes this was because of her religion. Evidence given to the court showed that [the other person was] at fault. The sentence was later suspended.

    Certificate regarding the disclosure of certain information under section 438

16. At the outset of the hearing, the Tribunal referred to a section 438 Certificate which had been issued by the Department and was on the applicants’ file. This certificate referred to matters which should not be disclosed to the applicants or their representative because there were details regarding the Department’s forensic document examination processes and release of such information may provide those who engage in document fraud insights into improving their products, thus undermining the Department’s capacity to detect fraudulent documents. The Tribunal considered that the certificate had been validly issued but was obliged to inform the applicants and their representative of the existence of this and ask for a response. A copy of the certificate was provided to the applicant’s representative and he was asked for his response as to whether in his opinion this was a validly issued.

1. The applicant's representative submitted that the provision of fraudulent documents is a serious crime. In this case there had been contradictory feedback by the Department on the documents the applicants had submitted which were issued by the Egyptian [authorities]. He said that the documents which had been submitted had been obtained through a lawyer in Egypt and provided to the Department as soon as possible and in good faith. They were not notified that the Department had concerns about the documents and were not given the chance to submit evidence on their validity. The applicants were interviewed [in] May 2014 by the Department and the documents were provided after that. Initially they had provided copies of the documents received from Egypt and then the originals. The primary review applicant had asked her lawyer in Egypt to obtain these which took some time and they maintain that the documents are genuine.

2. The Tribunal finds that the section 438 Certificate was valid and determined not to provide the applicant with a copy of the documentation examination case report for the reasons given by the Department. The applicant and her representative did not submit that this should be provided.

   Christian

3. The applicant confirmed she grew up as a Coptic Orthodox Christian but after she completed college she accompanied a friend to a conference at [Church 2] which was a charismatic church; in August 1997 and during this time when she attended the church she experienced God. After that she became involved with [Church 2] until she left Egypt.

4. The Tribunal notes that the delegate has accepted that the applicant is a Christian and continues to attend church in Australia. The delegate also accepted that the applicant had spent her life working and attending church and looking after her elderly parents until her mother died in 2012. The delegate was also satisfied that the applicant was single while living in Egypt and her [sibling] lives in Australia.

5. The Tribunal is also satisfied that the applicant, who spoke very knowledgably about her participation and faith with the Catholic Church in Egypt, is a Christian and devoted to the work she had done with the church. The Tribunal also accepts she continues to practise her faith.

   The applicant's outreach activities in Egypt and events in 2013

6. In relation to the applicant's involvement with the outreach program (the [Ministry 1] group or [name] service), the Tribunal questioned the applicant extensively about this program and her involvement. The Tribunal notes the delegate did not satisfied that the applicant had travelled to [Town 1] in March 2013 with this group or that the group was blockaded by a mob at the entrance of the town.

7. The Tribunal found the applicant to be able to once again speak knowledgably about the program and to provide details about her involvement, where she had travelled across Egypt while a part of this group and a description of the work they did. The applicant said the group was called [Ministry 1] and is associated with [Church 2] in Cairo. The group was comprised of some regular members and others who would participate from time to time. Their main purpose was to visit poor and underprivileged areas across Egypt and preach to Christians as well as to provide material aid.

8. The applicant said there were some regulars in the group and others who would attend from time to time. Their purpose is to teach poor Christians around Egypt about God and Christ and to provide financial assistance. They would also speak to non-Christians and provide assistance as needed. This group visits poor areas in the country and knock on doors to tell people they will be meeting at the local church. Some of the houses they visit belong to Muslims. She and her group have visited various areas in Upper Egypt and in Tanta an area near Alexandria. She provided the names of areas the group has [visited]. She said the way they work is that the local priest will invite the group to visit in order to hold meetings and to preach the gospel and not all the churches they visit are Catholic, some are Orthodox. Muslims are welcome to attend but they are not deliberately sought out. The applicant said that [Ministry 1] is also known as a [name] service. They often visited Minya and before the revolution they did not experience any problems in the area. However during and after the revolution this area has become dangerous for Christians. She and her group continued to go to these areas because of their work for [God]. She has been involved with this group since about March or April 1998.

9. The applicant has provided links to a [social media] page which refers to [Ministry 2] and has provided photographs of this. [Ministry 2] has the applicant as a member of that group. The applicant's own [social media] page is also linked to this site.

10. The applicant was asked to describe the events of March 2013. She said she and her group of eight people were travelling to [Town 1] on a bus as the Coptic Orthodox Priest of [another] Church had invited them. In anticipation of their arrival, the priest had announced to the local congregation that there would be a meeting at the church and they were to meet the priest there. They were to be accompanied by members of the congregation to go door knocking and visit people in their homes to tell them about the meeting. This was not the first time they had been there. The applicant told the Tribunal that on their approach to [Town 1] the bus was stopped because of a blockade. There were some people there, both men and women and they had placed tyres on the road. It seems that these people knew they would be coming and were trying to stop them from going to the church and having their meeting. She said that [Town 1] looks like a village but it is more like a small town not a big city like Cairo. Their car was stopped by the blockade and there were other cars behind them. She and others got off the bus and they were told they were not allowed to continue because they were infidels. The leader of their group telephoned the priest to let him know they were being prevented from coming to the church and he told the priest there was someone in the group who were preventing them from proceeding called [Sheikh C]. She found out later that this group of people who were blockading them entry to the town had accused them of converting young Muslim girls to Christianity. There was some violence as they tried to negotiate with these people. The applicant said that the police station was [number] kilometres from the blockade but there was a checkpoint outside [Town 1] and they went there to make a complaint when they were unable to proceed into the town. She said that the delegate was right in saying that the main police station is in the centre of town but they did not go there they went to the checkpoint. She said the delegate did not ask her to specify where they went. She said the whole group attended the checkpoint to make the complaint to the police. The police took their statement and it was the applicant who made this on their behalf. Then the group [leader] considered it was best for them to leave and avoid more trouble, so they returned to Cairo.

11. The applicant said that apparently the next day, [Sheikh C] and others made a complaint against her. She believes that he was among those at the blockade. As a result, she was later summoned to Minya regarding the complaint and she and her father travelled there by train [in] April 2013. The summons said she had to report to the police in Minya within 48 hours. The applicant said that the number of train services to Upper Egypt was restricted due to the political situation with Morsi and the army at the time. She said that when she and her father got off the train there were people there waiting for them and they were attacked and received some injuries. She and her father managed to get away and got into a taxi with the help of passers-by and went to the hospital for treatment after which they proceeded to the police station. She does not really know how these people knew they were coming. She thinks maybe they were told by someone at the police station as she was required to let them know she was coming. When they arrived at the police station she found out about the complaint that had been made by [Sheik C] against her. She was questioned about this but was not given much of a chance to answer the questions. The police did not ask for witnesses. They questioned her about the reason she had been travelling to [Town 1], about the people she was with and the purpose of their visit. They told her she had been charged with converting Muslim girls and it was against the law. She was taken to [a police station]. When she was there the prosecutor told her that under the law she could be jailed for this offence. She was then formally charged and told she would be detained for [number] days while they continued to question her or she could be released on bail and she would be questioned later. The charge as she understood it was insulting Islam and the conversion of Muslim girls to Christianity. The police took fingerprints before her release. In the meantime her father had been waiting outside and offered to pay the bail for her. The police however also spoke to him and accused him of paying contributions to the church for the purposes of financing the conversion of Muslims to Christianity. He was not charged at that time and her father paid the bail money and they were both free to go.

12. The applicant was asked about the charges relating to transporting explosives or other inflammable material which was referred to by the delegate in relation to Article 170 with which she was charged. The applicant said she does not know why this was added to the charges but was advised by her lawyer in Egypt that it was a common strategy to add such charges relating to anti-terrorism.

13. The applicant said she and her father had gone to see a lawyer when they returned home and she was informed that a hearing was to be held [in] July 2013. She and her father had already been granted visas to visit Australia and they continued with their plans. Her lawyer appeared for her at the hearing to seek an adjournment and the hearing did not proceed. Afterward the hearing her lawyer called her to advise her position was critical in relation to the charges. During this time the legal system was in disarray because the political situation remained volatile and the courts were soon closed. She left the matter in her lawyer’s hands as she and her father decided it was too dangerous to return. As far as she is aware the charges are still pending and there has not been a hearing to determine the outcome. The case has not been withdrawn by the authorities.

14. In relation to the applicant's claim that she will not be given a fair trial if she were to return to Egypt, the applicant's was asked about her previous experiences. The applicant said that given the nature of the charges and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as the tensions between Muslims and Christians she believes that she will not receive a fair trial and that the authorities would not have been bothered to investigate the matter properly. In the past she was prosecuted for [manslaughter]. She was found guilty and given a custodial sentence, however because of subsequent evidence that she was not entirely to [blame], the custodial sentence was suspended and she was not required to serve time in jail. She believes that in the initial finding of guilt, the court was influenced by religious matters because she was a Christian and the [other person] and his family were Muslim. She was also accused of deliberately planning to [harm the other person] because he was a Muslim but this was not proven. The applicant said that religion plays a major part in every aspect of life in Egypt including within the legal system, within law enforcement and within the army. If she were to go back appear in court she will be dealt with more harshly because of the previous legal proceedings against her and, in this case, the issues will be more overtly religious. The courts do not take the charge of conversion of Muslims lightly.

15. It was submitted by the applicant's representative that the court places more weight on witnesses who are Muslim in such cases. The country information which confirms that religion, in particular Sharia plays a large part in legal proceedings and that many judges are aligned to either the Salafists or the Muslim Brotherhood. After the revolution and the change to the present government many judges reverted back to dressing in a western style and shaved their beards but this is only a surface image because the beliefs are still present.

16. The applicant said she is not sure what would happen if she were to return to Egypt as it is not a safe place. There is widespread corruption and although the general situation appears to be stable it is unpredictable. It is not safe for Christians to leave their home. She wants to serve God and to do so she needs to go out. Christian women are easily identifiable and are targeted because they dress differently and do not wear scarves to cover their heads. If a woman does not wear a scarf she is easily identified as a Christian. Anyone can attack her because they will assume she is a Christian even if she is not wearing a crucifix. She fears that [Sheikh C] will find her and harm her because she is the only person who complained against him to the police when he opposed her and her group in [Town 1].

17. The applicant said that because of the situation in Egypt regarding Christians, many are seeking to leave the country.

18. The Tribunal also spoke to the second named applicant who confirmed that he is [age] years old and born in [location]. He moved to Cairo when he was [age] years old and worked as an [occupation] at a [workplace] (details of this were provided). He told the Tribunal that he is ill and frail. He lives with his daughter and he has no other family in Egypt, apart from one [sibling] who is [younger] but they did not see each other much. He has a [child] who has been living in Australia for many years and is an Australian citizen. He told the Tribunal that he cannot return to Egypt and live by himself and he fears the Muslims there. He told the Tribunal he has experienced harm in Egypt as has his daughter. In 2013 his daughter was prevented to going to a place to do some charity work and was arrested. He had to pay [amount] Egyptian pounds to get her released on bail or she would have been held until the trial. The authorities also accused him of supporting his daughter’s activities and that he was helping to finance the conversion of Muslim girls to Christianity. They did not charge him at the time his daughter was charged but expects that if he were to return he would be charged.

19. The Tribunal has also spoken to [Mr A] and originally from Egypt who is a friend of the applicants. [Mr A] confirmed that in his experience he believes that if the applicants were to return to Egypt they will face certain harm. The fact that she had been previously charged after the [manslaughter incident], will exacerbate her situation in court. He also told the Tribunal that the Muslim Brotherhood networks in Egypt are everywhere and information is shared between the police and the government and it is easy for those involved to find out about a person they are targeting. There is a lot of corruption and even though the Muslim Brotherhood is now an illegal organisation, there is still a great deal of support for them although it is hidden.

20. The Tribunal has considered the evidence in relation to the applicant's claims to have been a member of the [Church 2] in Cairo and her involvement in the [Ministry 1] group which provides outreach services and material aid in many areas of Egypt. There has been evidence submitted in relation to the [Ministry 1] group or [Ministry 2] and the Tribunal places weight on a letter provided by [Pastor B], the primary review applicant's on-line (albeit limited) presence and links to [Ministry 2] whose headquarters are at the [Church 2] in Cairo. The Tribunal also questioned the applicant extensively about the details of her involvement in this group including the length of her membership with the group, her and the group’s activities and where they had travelled. Unlike the delegate, the Tribunal found her evidence in relation to her involvement to be persuasive, knowledgeable and credible.

21. The Tribunal notes that the delegate had serious concerns about the applicant's claim that because of her involvement in the [Ministry 1] group, that it was unlikely that the Catholic Church would send a group of people to Minya which has the highest incidence of sectarian violence in Egypt. The Tribunal notes that although Christians are a minority in Egypt, there are many churches of various denominations including the Catholic [Church].[8] [Details deleted].[9] The Tribunal also notes that [Pastor B] has provided evidence that in the past while in Egypt, he was also a member of the [Ministry 1] team associated with [Church 2] as was the applicant. The Tribunal accepts the applicant's credible evidence that she was a member of the [Ministry 1] team whose aim is to provide spiritual and pastoral services as well as material aid for poor Christians in Upper Egypt. The Tribunal accepts her evidence that this is a voluntary group who chose to continue the work despite the unrest in Egypt because of their belief in their duty to do so.

    [8] [Information deleted].

    [9] [Information deleted].

    Blockade in March 2013

22. The Tribunal has noted the delegate’s concerns in relation to this event. The delegate considered the applicant's evidence in relation to this to be vague and considered the information she gave about [Town 1] to be inconsistent, especially in relation to the location of the police station where she claimed her group went to lodge a complaint against the people who were blockading the [Ministry 1]’s group to the town. The delegate also considered it was implausible that a mob would blockade a major road to [Town 1] and identified the group as Christians by their clothing. The delegate also noted the location of the police station in [Town 1] was different to that claimed by the applicant.

23. The applicant was questioned about this event in some detail and the Tribunal considered in light of the climate of unrest and regular conflicts which occur in Egypt between Christians and Muslims that her claim was plausible especially in a town in Upper Egypt. Country information (see the attachment) indicates that sectarian tensions have increased in Egypt in recent times in particular in 2013 when Morsi supporters attacked people, churches and people. Country information also indicates that in some cases, outside major of major cities the authorities failed to respond to or prevent sectarian violence and many perpetrators of attacks have not been prosecuted. It is in the Tribunal’s opinion plausible that news of the [Ministry 1] visit to [Town 1] was known because it would have been announced by the sponsoring priest to his congregation, news of which in turn would be spread to the wider community. It is not inconceivable that particular extremist elements in the town would take offence at the visit and would take some action to prevent it. In relation to the delegate’s concern about how they were identified, the applicant's evidence was essentially that this group knew they were coming and indeed had blockaded the road to all traffic. Her group were dressed in their normal clothes and it would be assumed from this that they were not Muslim; especially as the women did not wear headscarves the men did not have beards. This is a sign of the difference between Muslims and Christians in Egypt. Those who are not Muslim are easily identified Upper Egypt.

24. In relation to the location of the police station, the applicant said that she was not questioned about this during the protection visa interview. If she had been she would have explained that it was not the police station in the town but a checkpoint at the outskirts.

1. The Tribunal accepts the applicant's evidence that her group was intercepted and denied entry into [Town 1] in March 2013 and this would have been at a time when tensions were running high because of the problems which beset the government and which led to the ousting of the former President Morsi.

2. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s country report on Egypt refers to the events in 2013 as follows:

   2.4 As President, Morsi drew criticism for his perceived inability to improve Egypt’s economic situation and his increasing authoritarian tendencies. Sporadic, large-scale protests and violent clashes took place between Morsi’s opponents and supporters, and led quickly to crippling polarisation in Egypt. Massive nationwide anti-government protests led to a military intervention that removed Morsi from power and re-installed an interim military regime in 2013…[10]

   [10] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2017, DFAT Country Information Report – Egypt, 19 May

3. The same report also states at [3.2] that religion is central to identity in Egypt.[11]

   [11] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2017, DFAT Country Information Report – Egypt, 19 May

4. In relation to the location of the police station, and noting the delegate’s comments about this, the Tribunal accepts the applicant's evidence on this point.

   Charges against the applicant

5. The delegate did not accept the documents submitted by the applicant to support her claim that she was arrested and charged by the authorities in April 2013. The Tribunal has considered the certified translation of documents submitted to the Department which appear to have been issued by the[City 1][12] [government agency].

   [12] [Information deleted].

6. The first document is an investigations report regarding a complaint made by the applicant [in] March 2013 that she and others had travelled to [City 1] and [another city] on a microbus to visit poor families and they were stopped from entering the village and verbally assaulted. The report goes on to state that the applicant was asked if she knew those who had assaulted them and she answered she did not but the person who provoked this event was [Sheikh C] but she did not know his full name. The outcome of this report which was signed off by the prosecutor [in] April 2013 was that it was to be “filed against anonymous people for lack of evidence”.

7. The second document essentially refers to a complaint by [Sheikh C] (his full name has been provided) and another person (name provided) who lodged a complaint against the applicant attended the town on 4 March 2013 and accused her of inciting sedition among people in [Town 1] in [City 1]. He has complained that the applicant along with others come to town and preach with the intention of converting some girls to Christianity and is affiliated with a church in Cairo. The complaint also refers to the applicant disdaining the Islamic religion and inciting sedition amongst Muslims. The complainant states that the applicant and the others were prevented from entering the town. This report indicates that [in] March 2013 the prosecutor ordered the arrest and detention of the applicant for questioning.

8. The third document is dated [April] 2013 and issued by the [City 1 government agency] which essentially refers to a complaint made by the applicant regarding an attack on her father and herself that morning. This report refers to a hospital report from the casualty unit that the applicant had sustained [injuries]. It also refers to the second named applicant having been [injured]. The applicant is noted to have told the police that she had been summoned by [City 1] Prosecutions and she was accompanied by her father. When they arrived in town many people, including [Sheikh C] came and assaulted them. This document refers to the report being “filed against anonymous people for lack of evidence” and to be submitted to the prosecutor.

9. Two other documents, translated as medical reports dated [April] 2013 issued by the [City 1 hospital] refers to the each of the applicants having sustained injuries as a result of a claimed attack.

10. The sixth document is dated [April] 2013 and refers to an interview of the applicant on that date regarding the allegations of inciting sedition, disdaining the Islamic religion and delivering Christian homilies to Muslim girls with the intention of “tempting them to convert to Christianity by preaching”. This interview was then referred to the prosecutor for action. According to this document, the prosecutor’s decision after reviewing the papers was to release the applicant on bail upon a surety of [amount] pounds or she was to be remanded in custody for [number] days pending investigations. The prosecutor also determined to refer the report to headquarters to issue a referral order.

11. The seventh document dated [May] 2013 is a referral on the request of the public prosecutor that an investigation has led to a finding of validity of the allegation against the defendant (the applicant).

12. The eighth document was dated  [May] 2013 and is a referral decree issued by the [City 1] Public Prosecutor deciding to refer the accused and a decision made on  [May] 2013 by the head of the [City 1] Public Prosecutions to refer the accused (the applicant) before the court because she incited sedition and disdained the Islamic religion by delivering Christian homilies to Muslim girls with the intention of tempting them to convert to the Christian religion by preaching. By doing so she had breached the second clause of the Egyptian constitution which stipulates that the official religion of the country is Ilam and its laws shall be applied. She also breached Clause 102, 161 and 170 of the penal law. A hearing date was set down for [July] 2013 in the [City 1] Court.

13. The documents have been examined by the Department’s Document Examination Unit (DEU) and the report of that unit was the subject of the section 438 Certificate referred to earlier. The conclusion by the DEU was that the there was a strong probability that at least the police investigation report documents were contrived and as the value of the secondary documents is dependent on the integrity of the police investigation report the documents were considered to be suspect. This adverse information was put to the applicant by the Department in a letter dated [October] 2014. A written response was made to the Department regarding this adverse information. The delegate noted the response and noted that rather than providing compelling information to demonstrate that the documents were not contrived the applicant's representative suggested that the irregularities identified should be put to the applicant or the findings of the DEU be put aside.

14. The applicant told the Tribunal that after the interview with the delegate during which she was asked if she had any documents, she contacted her lawyer in Egypt and requested these. They were then sent from her lawyer in Egypt from and she received them in good faith. Her lawyer was representing her and appeared in court in her absence to notify the authorities that she was overseas and to request an adjournment. It was after this that he advised her that the matters being raised were serious and she should consider not returning. 

15. The Tribunal has noted the concerns raised by the DEU that there was a strong possibility that at least the police investigation report was contrived. The Tribunal noted that although the DEU did not raise specific concerns about the remaining documents, their integrity was considered to be questionable in light of the findings of the police investigation report. The Tribunal was very troubled by the findings of the DEU and discussed this with the applicants.

16. Insofar as the documents support the applicant's version of events, the Tribunal was unable to reconcile the findings of the DEU and the evidence provided by the applicant. The DEU examination of this case and other similar cases has led to the opinion of a strong possibility that the police investigation report was contrived. This conclusion was based on certain [factors].

17. Weighing against the documentation provided is the overall acceptance of the applicant's claims for reasons discussed earlier. The Tribunal found the applicant to give her evidence in a credible manner and her evidence was confirmed by her father. While it is common, in the Tribunal’s experience that applicants sometimes exaggerate or embellish their narratives in order to attempt to establish their claims and on occasion to provide documents in support, is the impression by the Tribunal that the applicant’s evidence was her personal and lived experiences and that her fear of returning to Egypt was real. The Tribunal also accepts that her father’s fear of returning is genuine.

18. The Tribunal is willing to give the applicant the benefit of the doubt given her overall consistent evidence in relation to her claims and has therefore placed little if any weight on the documents provided.

19. In light of the above findings, the Tribunal must next consider whether their fears of being harmed on return are ‘well-founded’. The High Court of Australia has held that a person has a ‘well-founded fear’ of persecution if the person has a genuine fear founded on a ‘real chance’ of being persecuted for a Convention reason. In a leading case on this issue, the former Chief Justice of the High Court, Sir Anthony Mason stated that the expression ‘a real chance’[13]:

    [13] Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1989) 169 CLR 379 at 389

    …clearly conveys the notion of a substantial, as distinct from a remote chance, of persecution occurring … If an applicant establishes that there is a real chance of persecution, then his fear, assuming that he has such a fear, is well-founded, notwithstanding that there is less than a fifty per cent chance of persecution occurring. This interpretation fulfils the objects of the Convention in securing recognition of refugee status for those persons who have a legitimate or justified fear of persecution on political grounds if they are returned to their country of origin.

20. The High Court’s decision in Chan establishes that a person can have a well-founded fear of persecution even though the persecution occurring is well below 50 percent. Indeed, the High Court has prescribed a low threshold for determining whether an applicant's fear is ‘well-founded’ and it can be reached even if the event feared is ‘unlikely to occur’ and has only a ’10 percent chance’ of occurring, however the chance of it occurring must be more than ‘far-fetched’ or ‘remote’[14], and the evidence must indicate ‘real grounds for believing that the applicant … is at risk of persecution’; a fear ‘is not well-founded if it is merely assumed or if it is mere speculation’[15].

    [14] Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1989) 169 CLR 379 at 429 per McHugh J

    [15] Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559 at 572

21. In this context, the Tribunal must determine whether on the basis of the circumstances that exist now, there is a real chance the applicants would suffer persecution in the reasonably foreseeable future if they return to Egypt.

22. The Tribunal notes that country information indicates that while the political and security conditions in Egypt initially settled for a while, there have been increasing religious tensions as a result of the significant changes since the military intervention that removed the former president from power on 3 July 2013. As the Coptic Church had played an active role in political developments during this period, with the Coptic Pope Tawadros II endorsing the military intervention against Morsi and strongly backing the Sisi government,[16] this has caused increased sectarian tensions among the Muslim and Christian populations. The Tribunal accepts that after the 2011 ‘revolution’ which led to the fall of President Mubarak, Christians in Egypt witnessed an increased level of harassment and intimidation by more conservative Muslims. This was particularly the case during the rule of President Morsi, who was removed from power in 2013. The Tribunal notes that the events claimed by the applicant occurred during the rule of the former president. The Tribunal notes that in the lead up to and after the fall of the Morsi government, some Muslim Brotherhood figures and supporters place part of the blame for the fall of the government on Coptic Christians. This has led to acts of violence against Christian Copts and their properties. This anti-Copt violence calmed by around August 2013. However the events claimed by the applicant had occurred before this. According to recent country information reported by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) although the situation has remained generally calm for some time, however recent events in Egypt indicate that there has once again been violence towards Christians.

    [16] See Fahmi, G The Copt Church and Politics in Egypt, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 18 December 2014, available at: Kingsley, P Egyptian President Attends Coptic Christmas Eve in Cairo, The Guardian, 8 January 2015, available at

23. On balance the Tribunal accepts earlier reports on the situation concerning Christians in Egypt by DFAT that while Christians might face persistent societal discrimination, this is low level and vast majority do not face violence in their daily lives and live peacefully with their Muslim neighbours, especially in urban areas such as Cairo where the applicants are from. In DFAT’s Thematic Report on Coptic Christians in November 2015 it was reported that generally Coptic Christians are not at risk of targeted violence from the state or its institutions and that the Muslim Brotherhood is not in power and it members are subject to prosecution. However more recent country information indicates that once again Christians are being targeted and the authorities have been unable to effectively prevent or prosecute individuals involved in sectarian violence.

24. In relation to Christians generally in Egypt, the Tribunal notes that country information confirms there is discrimination at all levels of Egyptian society against Christians and although discrimination on the basis of religion is prohibited under Egyptian law, there are reports that confirm that Christians continue to face official and societal discrimination and that this has been prevalent for decades. In October 2011, while the Supreme Council of the Armed forces issued a decree to amend provisions of the Egyptian Penal Code to explicitly prohibit discrimination on religious grounds[17] and added Article 161(ii), defining discrimination as ‘any action, or lack of action, that leads to discrimination between people or against a sect due to gender, origin, language, religion, or belief’,[18] and provides for fines or imprisonment, for perpetrators of acts of discrimination; this amendment however does not include any enforcement mechanisms.[19] Further there have been no indications according the US Department of State that during 2013 that the government enforced the 2011 amendments to the penal code that make discrimination a crime.[20] In 2014 DFAT has also reported that while ‘anti‑discrimination laws exist, these can be difficult to implement’.[21]

    [17] US Department of State 2014, International Religious Freedom Report for 2013: Egypt, 28 July, p.4 Accessed 29 July 2014 CIS29206

    [18] US Department of State 2012, International Religious Freedom Report 2011 - Egypt, 30 July, Section 2 Accessed 17 December 2013

    [19] US Department of State 2014, International Religious Freedom Report for 2013: Egypt, 28 July, p.4 Accessed 29 July 2014 CIS29206

    [20] US Department of State 2014, International Religious Freedom Report for 2013: Egypt, 28 July, p.18 Accessed 29 July 2014 CIS29206

    [21] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

25. The US Department of State’s International Religious Freedom report notes that although Egypt has legislation that prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion; in practice these laws are rarely enforced.[22]

    [22] US Department of State 2014, International Religious Freedom Report for 2013: Egypt, 28 July, p.18 Accessed 29 July 2014 CIS29206; Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

26. Although the 2014 Constitution officially recognises Christianity and includes an anti‑discrimination clause and Article 53 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion and belief,[23] country information indicates that it still remains to be seen whether there will be substantive legal and policy towards addressing the deep-seated discrimination Christians have faced in public office, education, political participation and other areas of civic life’.[24] The European Parliament also notes that taking into account that lack of legal implementation and a weak police response which are among the main causes of violence and discrimination of religious minorities in Egypt; it is unlikely that any improvement in the legal framework will bring changes to the situation on the ground.[25]

    [23] Constitution of the Arab Republic of Egypt 2014 – Unofficial Translation Accessed 11 February 2015 CIS2F827D92048

    [24] Minority Rights Group International 2013, World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples - Egypt: Copts, November, UNHCR Refworld Accessed 31 January 2014 CX317623

    [25] European Parliamentary Research Service 2014, Egypt’s New Constitution and Religious Minorities’ Rights -  Prospect of Improvement?, 23 January, p.6 Accessed 11 February 2015 CIS2F827D92044

27. The Tribunal notes that DFAT has assessed community prejudice against Christians to be pervasive and the likelihood of encountering societal discrimination is ‘heavily dependent on geographic and socio‑economic factors’, with discrimination ‘low‑level and infrequent’ in middle class urban areas but ‘higher’ in poor urban and rural areas.[26] According to DFAT, ‘most Copts in both urban and rural areas do not experience harassment and discrimination in their daily lives and live alongside Muslims across all social classes, genders and backgrounds’.[27] Nevertheless, DFAT states that since the January 2011 revolution, there have been reports of ‘harassment and intimidation of Christians and Muslims by more conservative Muslims’ and notes that it is aware of ‘anecdotal reports of Christian men and women being encouraged – or cajoled – to convert to Islam.’[28] In its June 2014 policy document on Copts, the UK Border Agency similarly assessed that Christians face ‘personal and collective societal discrimination.’[29] According to Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Deputy Director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa division, ‘Coptic Christians across Egypt face discrimination in law and practice.’[30]

    [26] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

    [27] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

    [28] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

    [29] UK Border Agency 2014, Country Information and Guidance Egypt: Christians, 30 June, p.7 OG180885B8

    [30] Amnesty International 2013, Egypt’s Coptic Christians must be protected from sectarian violence, 27 March Accessed 20 May 2013 CX307094

1. Recent reports published by the US Department of State,[31] the Carnegie Endowment,[32] Open Democracy[33] and Ahram Online[34] all refer to Christians facing official discrimination in Egypt within the public sector including government, universities, security forces and the judiciary. Although DFAT has provided a different assessment stating that ‘Copts experience low levels’ of official discrimination[35] and while DFAT reports that ‘there is a low level of discrimination against Copts in public sector employment’ it also notes that ‘the percentage of Copts in the Egyptian civil service is broadly representative of the religious breakdown of the population.’[36]

   [31] US Department of State 2014, International Religious Freedom Report for 2013: Egypt, 28 July, pp. 13-15 Accessed 29 July 2014 CIS29206

   [32] Brownlee, J 2013, Violence Against Copts in Egypt, 14 November, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Accessed 10 December 2013 CX316406

   [33] Fayek, M 2014, Copts in El Sisi’s Egypt, 29 May, Open Democracy Accessed 10 February 2015 CX1B9ECAB9714

   [34] Fayek, M 2014, Copts in El Sisi’s Egypt, 29 May, Open Democracy Accessed 10 February 2015 CX1B9ECAB9714 Ahram Online is a state-owned English-language news website published by Al-Ahram Establishment, Egypt’s largest news organisation. Al Ahram Establishment publishes Arabic-language daily Al-Ahram, which is the oldest and one of the most widely read daily newspapers in Egypt and the Arab world. See Ahram Online n.d., About AhramOnline Accessed 2 December 2013; BBC Monitoring 2013, Media Environment Guide: Egypt January 2013, 28 January, Open Source Center – Accessed 23 May 2013; Ezzat, D 2013, ‘Egyptian Christians struggle to overcome minority status’, Ahram Online, 27 September Accessed 3 October 2013 CX316469

   [35] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

   [36] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 28 January

2. Although the country information indicates that while Egypt has anti-discrimination laws, the information confirms that these are often not enforced when it relates to Coptic Christians and other religious minorities. Therefore the Tribunal accepts that as a Christian the applicant has faced discrimination in a manner which has led to her and her father being attacked, the primary review applicant being arrested and charged for allegedly attempting to convert Muslim girls to Christianity. The Tribunal accepts that discrimination of Christians in Egypt is religiously motivated and is aimed at all religious minorities. The applicant’s experience in relation to having difficulties seeking protection and redress from the authorities and failing to have that afforded to her because she is Christian is not unique.

3. The Tribunal notes that the Egyptian National Police are responsible for law enforcement nationwide and various sources including DFAT[37] indicate that police investigative skills remain poor and they suffer from shortfalls in training and equipment. DFAT also reports that the Egyptian police are a reflection of the Egyptian population and the increasingly conservative nature of the Egyptian society is mirrored in the police force particularly in rural areas. In areas outside major cities, the police live in the community they police and are subject to local pressure to make choices that are congruent with dominant social mores. The United States Department of State noted in 2013 that there were credible reports that security forces failed to prevent or respond to societal violence against Coptic Christians and other religious minorities. The UK Home Office’s Country Information Guidance, Egypt: Christians noted that “in MS (paragraph 151(1)) the Upper Tribunal found that there was inadequate state protection for Coptic Christians.[38]

   [37] United States Department of State Country Reports on Human Rights Practices – Egypt, 27 February 2014; DFAT Country Report, Egypt, 28 January 2014

   [38] UK Home Office Country Information and Guidance Egypt: Christians, 14 July 2014

4. The Tribunal accepts that the applicant and her group were targeted by Muslim extremists when she was on her way to Minya as part of a church outreach program. The Tribunal accepts this was a general targeting of a Christian group to prevent them from meeting with other Christians. The Tribunal also accepts that the applicant was specifically targeted as she was the one who made the complaint to the police on behalf of her group against those trying to prevent them from proceeding into the town to conduct their program. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was later arrested and charged with allegedly aiming to convert Muslims to Christianity because of this. The Tribunal is satisfied that this conclusion is supported by the country information in relation to blasphemy and defamation of religion and the difficulties faced by those who have been charged with such offences.[39] The Tribunal considers that country information indicates that such targeting of people like the applicant who was a Christian and involved in Christian outreach occurred in the context of the breakdown in the social order following the 2011 ‘revolution’, especially while the Muslim Brotherhood held sway and power and when Christians in Egypt witnessed an increased level of harassment and intimidation by more conservative Muslims.

   [39] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 2017 DFAT Country Report – Egypt, 19 May

5. The Tribunal also notes that since April of this year, despite the declaration of a state of emergency by the Egyptian government sectarian violence has been on the increase and Coptic Orthodox Christians have suffered horrendous casualties and deaths as a result of who they are and what they believe in regardless of the assurance of the Egyptian state’s willingness to protect them against attacks by radical non-Christian elements and despite legal guarantees expressed in eloquent language in enactments of the Egyptian legislature and in the Egyptian Constitution. The Tribunal has noted recent developments regarding an increase in sectarian violence and the targeting of Christians and accepts that the applicant had been targeted because she was identified as a Christian who was involved in Christian outreach work and is vulnerable to the charges of blasphemy and defamation of religion if she was to return to Egypt and seek to challenge these. The Tribunal accepts that her father (the second named applicant) would also be vulnerable to similar charges as he was threatened at the time of the applicant's arrest for financing his daughter’s activities. The Tribunal also notes the country information in DFAT’s 2017 country report on Egypt that such charges faced by the applicant and the possibility of charges faced by her father, rarely have adequate defence and are generally convicted. They also face penalties of monetary fines and imprisonment from six months to five years.

6. The Tribunal has also considered whether the applicants could safely relocate to another area of Egypt to avoid the harm feared but concluded that this was not possible or reasonable in her circumstances. The Tribunal notes that the applicants are from Cairo. Although DFAT assesses that in urban areas the Egyptian state is generally able to provide protection to Christians and see this in the interests of the state to be responsive to Christian grievances,[40] however numerous other sources including DFAT itself refer to the failure of authorities to carry out adequate investigations and prosecutions in cases of sectarian violence which has contributed to an air of relative impunity.[41] Despite the election of a new president in May 2014 and the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, the evidence before the Tribunal does not indicate that the situation in relation to state protection for Christians has changed. Further, in this instance it is the state that has brought charges against the applicant and the Tribunal accepts that the state will not protect her. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that it would not be reasonable for the applicant to relocate as discrimination against Christians is pervasive across Egypt and there is a high likelihood she will be prosecuted and imprisoned. There is also likelihood that the second named applicant will also be charged and prosecuted in spite of his failing health. In view of the applicants’ experiences prior to leaving Egypt, the Tribunal accepts that the applicants will not be safe or that they could or would be protected by the state. The Tribunal considers that the applicants will be unable to rely on state protection from the harm they fear as the flawed state processes have failed to protect them in the past. The Tribunal is satisfied that this amounts to serious harm such as to constitute persecution within the meaning of the Convention and for the purposes of the Act. It therefore follows that if the applicants return home, there is a real chance they will suffer serious harm amounting to persecution for reasons of their religion.

7. While official and societal discrimination of themselves may not constitute serious harm, the Tribunal considers the pending charges for blasphemy and defamation of religion as well as the increasing general civil unrest and attacks on Christians in Egypt, the cumulative effect of these in conjunction with the applicants’ past experiences of harm are sufficiently serious as to constitute persecution. The Tribunal is satisfied that cumulatively there is a real chance that the applicants are at risk of serious harm if they returns to Egypt now or in the reasonably foreseeable future and there is a real chance that persecution will occur. This is based on the applicants’ past experiences of discrimination and harm including the subsequent charges of blasphemy and defamation of religion and that supports a conclusion that their fear is well-founded. The country reports and recent disturbing developments in Egypt indicate that while a state of emergency had up to now contained sectarian violence, these recent events, indicate to the Tribunal that sectarian violence still occurs and there has been no appreciable change in the treatment of Christians.

8. Therefore the Tribunal finds that the treatment the applicants face on their return to Egypt amounts to serious harm on cumulative grounds and she satisfies s.91R(1) of the Act. The Tribunal is of the view that there is a real chance of persecution on the grounds of the applicants’ religion which includes their past experiences of discrimination, harassment and being charged with blasphemy and defamation of religion. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicants have a well-founded fear of being persecuted by non-state actors as well as by the state if they returned to Egypt, now or in the foreseeable future. The Tribunal also accepts that it would not be safe or reasonable for them to relocate to another part of the country because the state is unable to protect them. The Tribunal considers that the persecution from which they are at risk of suffering involves ‘serious harm’ as required by s.91R(1)(b) of the Act, in that it involves serious harm or ill treatment. The Tribunal finds that essential and significant reason for their fear of persecution is their religion as required by s.91R(1)(a). The Tribunal is satisfied that the persecution they are at risk of suffering involves a threat to his liberty, significant physical harassment and significant ill-treatment for a Convention reason.

9. For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is satisfied that each of the applicants is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention. Therefore the applicant satisfies the criterion set out in s.36(2)(a).

   DECISION

   [40] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2014, DFAT Thematic Report Egyptian Copts, 29 January

   [41] Human Rights Watch 2013, Egypt: Address recurring sectarian violence, 10 April accessed 15 May 2013 CX307093; Amnesty International 2013, Egypt’s Coptic Christians must be protected from sectarian violence, 27 March

10. The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicants satisfy s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

    Sophia Panagiotidis

    
    

    Member

    ATTACHMENT – Country information

    1.    The following additional country information has been considered by the Tribunal and provides a context for assessing the applicant's claims.

    Treatment of Christians in Egypt

    2.    The Egyptian constitution recognises Christianity, along with Islam and Judaism and grants Copts the same rights and freedoms as other Egyptians.

    3.    However, Egypt is overwhelmingly a Sunni Muslim country and Egyptian laws and long-standing practices are generally designed to safeguard the majority. The two problems mentioned most frequently as impacting on Christian practice are restrictions on building or repairing churches and the operation of laws banning “ridiculing or insulting heavenly religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism) or inciting sectarian strife”, commonly referred to as blasphemy law.

    4.    Sectarian tensions have increased in Egypt since the 1970s, due in part to economic problems and to weakening of law and order mechanisms. The resulting outbreaks of sectarian violence have mostly taken the form of vandalism and destruction of property and have occurred mostly in Upper Egypt, although Cairo and Alexandria have also been affected.

    5.    Egypt has experienced a number of significant changes in recent years. The Mubarak regime was overthrown in January 2011 and replaced with a military council which ruled until elections in June 2012, which were won by Mohammad Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi's government was removed by the military in July 2013 and replaced with a military dominated interim government which banned the Muslim Brotherhood in December 2013 and arrested between 22,000 and 29,000 Muslim Brotherhood supporters or suspected members, of whom some 7,000 remained in pre-trail detention in July 2014.[42] Elections held in May 2014 saw former defence Minister Abdul Fatah al-Sisi elected President.

    [42] Immigration Report pp 49-50 and Human Rights Watch Annual Report 2015, available at

    6.    While there is no evidence of a significant increase in sectarian violence during the time Morsi was President, there was an increase in the number of ultra conservative Islamist groups such as Salafist parties and in the frequency of negative and sometimes inflammatory anti-Christian statements which in turn contributed to an increase of threats and attacks on Christian communities in some areas.[43]

    [43] Issues Paper Egypt: Treatment of Coptic Christian & State Protection, Department of Immigration and Border Protection 3 March 2012 [Immigration Report] pp 54-55 and DFAT Thematic Report. 3.36

    7.    Coptic Christians were greatly concerned about their future under an Islamist government and most welcomed the military intervention which removed Morsi. This contributed to the most serious outbreak of anti-Christian sectarian violence in recent times, which occurred in July and August 2013 when supporters of President Morsi attacked Christian churches, property and people. According to DFAT this violence was not orchestrated by the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, but was carried out by radical supporters of the group in retaliation for what they saw as the significant role Christians played in Morsi's removal.

    8.    According to DFAT there has been a significant decrease in the scale and number of attacks against Copts under the Sisi administration. In a similar vein the US Committee for International Religious Freedom 2015, which covers 2014 and early 2015 stated that, while sporadic violence continued, the number and severity of violence incidents targeting Copts and their property had decreased significantly since the previous year.

    9.    However, the most recent United States International Religious Freedom Report[44] indicates that the Egyptian government failed to respond to or prevent sectarian violence in some cases, in particular outside of major cities according to human rights advocates and continued to hold “reconciliation sessions” to address incidents of sectarian violence which adopted findings favoring members of the majority Muslim community most of the time. “Reconciliation sessions” after sectarian attacks were used instead of prosecuting perpetrators and these sessions preclude recourse to the judicial system because in most cases the parties agreed to drop all formal charges and lawsuits and stipulated by the terms of the session. They failed to prosecute It was also reported that religious minorities continued to face significant threats of sectarian violence according to religious and human rights groups. There were also reports of lethal sectarian violence continuing over the year.

    [44] United States, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, International Religious Freedom Report for 2015

    10.  On 20 May 2015, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Centre for Religious Freedom, Samuel Tadros, gave testimony before the United States government’s House Committee on Foreign Affairs:

    …Failure by the Sisi regime to uphold the rule of law and protect the country’s Christians from attack bodes ill for the Middle East’s largest Christian community. While the Egyptian regime believes that its resort to reconciliation sessions instead of punishing the attackers helps in restoring and maintaining order, the reality is the exact opposite. The lack of punishment has created a culture of impunity, which in turn has become a culture of encouragement. Fanatics have rightly concluded that attacking Copts, not only will go unpunished, but more importantly will result in the mob’s demands being met. The Egyptian regime needs to offer better protection of its most vulnerable citizens preventing the attacks from taking place, and enforce the rule of law by bringing attackers to justice. The Egyptian regime needs to understand that protecting religious minorities is not a luxurious act to be done after serious security threats are dealt with or that punishing those attacking them can wait until stability and security is restored. Those attacking Copts share the same hatreds that fuels the terrorists and no stability or security can be achieved if criminals are not punished. Likewise, blasphemy accusations should not be used as a means to terrorize religious minorities.

    President Sisi has undertaken some symbolic gestures towards Copts such as visiting the Coptic Cathedral on Christmas Eve and has developed a good relationship with Pope Tawadros II. Symbolic gestures need to be followed by meaningful steps. Despite repeated promises, the Egyptian regime has failed to pass a new law governing the building of houses of worship, which would streamline the process of building churches. Despite proclamations that all of Egypt’s citizens are equal, Copts continue to suffer from discrimination in government appointments. Unofficial caps on Coptic representation in key state institutions such as the military and police force continue with several of them such as the intelligence service and the state security not having a single Copt within their ranks. President Sisi needs to change these discriminatory practices and develop a civil service based on merit and not one based on one’s faith…

    In his speech to scholars of Al Azhar, President Sisi underscored the need for religious reform. The fight against terrorism can no longer be limited to security means, but must be accompanied by a policy tool kit that addresses the root causes of radicalization and terrorism. He has stressed the need to change a religious discourse that has fueled hatred. While President Sisi’s call came as a welcome step, the Egyptian regime needs to prove its seriousness by beginning the process of reform. Instead of doing so, the Egyptian state has flipped the call on its head with the Ministry of Religious Endowments forming groups to spread awareness of the threats posed by atheists, Shia and Baha’is…[45]

    [45] Tadros, S 2015, ‘Egypt Two Years After Morsi Part 1’, Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, 20 May Accessed 12 October 2016 CISEC96CF1933

    11.  The Minority Rights Group International in their 2016 Annual report noted that:

    ‘...Egypt's sizeable Coptic Christian minority [has long] been victims of discrimination and persecution, who to some extent have benefitted from recent political reforms under Sisi. For example, Egypt's national elections in October 2015 saw Coptic Christians win 36 parliamentary seats, 6 percent of the total – an unprecedented achievement that represents an important milestone for the community. This has been accompanied by Sisi's apparent efforts to engage the Coptic church leadership, highlighted by his historic attendance of Coptic Christmas Eve mass in January 2015 – the first time a head of state has done so – as well as his offering of personal condolences to Pope Tawadros II in February 2015 after 21 Egyptian Copts were killed by ISIS militants in Libya. Yet despite these conciliatory gestures, Coptic Egyptians remain marginalized by state institutions and face ongoing risks of sectarian violence.’[46]

    [46] Minority Rights Group International, State of the World’s Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2016 – Egypt, 12 July 2016, Accessed on 19 Oct 2016

    12.  According to the 2016 United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) Annual Report:

    During the past year, the government’s efforts to combat extremism and terrorism have had a chilling impact on human rights and civil society activities in the country.’

    Against a backdrop of deteriorating human rights conditions, the Egyptian Government has taken positive steps to address some religious freedom concerns, including intolerance in religious curricula and extremism in religious discourse. In addition, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi continued to make public statements encouraging religious tolerance and moderation... There were notably fewer sectarian attacks against Christians and other religious minorities, and investigations and prosecutions continued for the unprecedented scale of destruction of churches and Christian property that occurred in the summer of 2013. However, other past large-scale sectarian incidents have not resulted in prosecutions, which continued to foster a climate of impunity.’

    In addition, the longstanding discriminatory and repressive laws and policies that restrict freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief remain in place. During [2015], there was an increase in Egyptian Courts prosecuting, convicting, and imprisoning Egyptian citizens for blasphemy and related charges. While the 2014 constitution includes improvements regarding freedom of religion or belief, the interpretation and implementation of relevant provisions remain to be seen, since the newly seated parliament has yet to act on the provisions. Based on these ongoing concerns, for the sixth year in a row, USCIRF recommends in 2016 that Egypt be designated a "country of particular concern," or CPC, under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA). USCIRF will continue to monitor the situation closely to determine if positive developments warrant a change in Egypt's status during the year ahead.’[47]

    [47] United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) 2016 Annual Report: Egypt, Key Findings, April 2016, 2016 Annual Report.pdf Accessed 19 Oct 2016 

    13.  According to an article in The Economist, dated 18 August 2016, regarding the situations of Christians in Egypt:

    Tensions are rising between Egypt’s two largest religious communities. The head of the Coptic church, Pope Tawadros, says attacks against Christians, who make up between 5% and 15% of the population, occur about once a month. The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), a pressure group, counted 77 incidents of sectarian violence and tension in Minya, where there is a large Christian minority, since 2011. At least ten incidents this year have resulted in discord, death and destruction.

    The EIPR’s count excludes a spate of violence three years ago, when protesting supporters of Muhammad Morsi, an Islamist president who was ousted in 2013, were violently dispersed by the government. In response, they burned dozens of churches. Since then Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi, a former general who deposed Mr Morsi, has tried to ease religious tensions. In 2015 he became the first president to attend (albeit briefly) Christmas mass at Cairo cathedral. “We’re all Egyptians, first and foremost,” he said. He attended again in 2016, vowing to restore churches and homes that had been burned down.

    Pope Tawadros has staunchly supported Mr Sisi, whom he once referred to as a “saviour” and “hero”. But Christians are growing disenchanted with Mr Sisi’s lack of progress. “We were expecting it to be much better,” says Magdi Kemal Habib of Minya, who nevertheless backs the president. The church’s leader in Minya is more critical. “He just gives good feelings, but these feelings need to be translated into actions,” says Bishop Makarios. Christians still face discrimination in the job market and are under-represented in government. The authorities often treat them like second-class citizens. It is, for example, exceedingly hard to get the state to recognise conversions to Christianity from Islam.

    When disputes with Muslims arise Christians say they are urged not to go to court. Instead officials rely on informal “reconciliation councils”. These invariably favour Muslims, who often face fines but no other punishment for crimes such as arson. Christians, on the other hand, tend to get harsh justice even for minor (or inane) offences: a teacher in Minya who filmed his students mocking the jihadists of Islamic State was convicted in court of blasphemy and sentenced to three years in prison. Four teenage students received sentences of up to five years in prison. Appeals are in the works, but a reconciliation council has expelled the teacher and his family from their village.

    Sectarian violence often accompanies Muslim claims that Christians are trying to build new churches. The government has made church-building extremely hard by withholding permits; there are 2,869 churches in Egypt compared with 108,395 mosques. A new bill proposes to guarantee that building permits for churches will be processed within four months. Bishop Makarios does not expect it to pass; nor, if it does, to solve the problem. “Even if there is a law allowing Christians to build churches, there will be a security official who will stop them,” he says.

    Some think the Coptic church has struck a Faustian pact with Mr Sisi. Despite the Bible’s direction to “defend the oppressed”, Pope Tawadros excuses the president’s human-rights abuses, while condemning the Arab uprisings of 2011 and echoing the government’s conspiracy theories. In return, Mr Sisi says all the right things. Last year he chastised Islamic scholars for not respecting other religions. “God did not create the world for the umma [Muslim community] to be alone,” he said. But Christians often feel that is exactly what Muslims in Egypt want.[48]

    [48] ‘Violence Is only one of the problems faced by Christians in Egypt’, 2016 The Economist, 18 August,

    14.  In December 2016, The Economist reported on the current situation of Egyptian Christian Copts in Egypt:

    No group immediately claimed responsibility for a bomb that ripped through a chapel in Egypt’s capital on December 11th, killing 25 worshippers and wounding 49. But those behind the attack in Cairo timed it to coincide with Sunday Mass for the Coptic Christians, next to their most important cathedral, on the eve of a national holiday marking the birth of the Islamic prophet Muhammed. In his remarks after the bombing, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, a general who overturned an Islamist government in 2013, reiterated his longstanding promises to ease religious tensions and protect minorities. It is a familiar refrain for Egypt’s long-suffering Christians.

    And yet for watchers of religious freedom, the Copts of Egypt present something of a paradox. Most pundits agree that the fortunes of this large and historically important community have somewhat improved since 2013. That year was a low point as mobs attacked their churches, property and communities. But in a country where sectarian tensions are never far from boiling over, and human rights in general are gravely abused, life for Christians has never been comfortable or free of danger.

    For better or worse, Mr Sisi has forged a close relationship with Pope Tawadros, the leader of the Coptic Christians who are thought to make up between 10% and 15% of Egypt’s 89m people. For two successive years, the president has appeared at the Copts’ Christmas celebrations in Cairo which take place in January. The Coptic prelate has been defensive of the Sisi government and discouraged his followers, in Egypt or elsewhere in the worId, from criticising the president. But some rank-and-file Egyptian Christians feel their spiritual leader has been too deferential to the president and too slow to articulate the community’s complaints.

    The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, one of two agencies in Washington, DC, that monitor liberty of belief, acknowledged in its latest annual report that the Cairo government had taken “some positive steps to address religious freedom concerns”, for example by curbing extremist messages in Muslim sermons and school lessons. It added that religiously inspired attacks on Christians and other minorities had diminished and there had been prosecutions, albeit on an insufficient scale, following the sectarian violence of 2013. The president had provided state help with rebuilding churches damaged during those attacks. Among the 596 members of the current parliament, the number of Christians was unusually high at 36.

    But USCIRF still rates Egypt as a “country of particular concern” in respect of religious liberty, in other words in the top global tier of violators: the commission’s chairman Robert George told Congress the country has taken “one step forward, two steps back” in matters of freedom of belief.

    The State Department, whose annual report on religious freedom around the world is an important reference work, also found that the Sisi government had failed in its stated intention of upholding Christian rights.

    The government frequently failed to prevent, investigate, or prosecute crimes targeting members of religious minority groups, which fostered a climate of impunity, according to a prominent local rights organisation. The government often failed to protect Christians targeted by kidnappings and extortion according to sources in the Christian community, and there were reports that security and police officials sometimes failed to respond to these crimes, especially in Upper Egypt (in the country’s impoverished south).

    Ordinary Christians are sceptical both of government promises and of their own church’s staunchly pro-government leadership. As is noted by Sarah Yerkes, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution think-tank, “Increasingly, Egyptian Christians are speaking out against the Egyptian government, ignoring the wishes of the church. Most recently 82 Copts signed a public letter protesting the church’s widespread support of [President] Sisi and expressed frustration that even under Sisi, the situation for Christians in Egypt has not improved.”

    In some ways, the Copts of Egypt have the worst of both worlds. President Sisi presents himself as their ally and protector, so Islamist foes of the government bitterly resent them. And in the end, the president's protection turns out not to be adequate.[49]

    [49] ‘One step forward, two steps back: The troubled lives of Egypt’s Coptic Christians’ 2016, The Economist, 11 December Accessed 12 December 2016 CX6A26A6E14889

    15.  Reporting on the recent spate of violence against Christians in Egypt, in April 2017, The New York Times provided the following:

    TANTA, Egypt — Rattling a country already wrestling with a faltering economy and deepening political malaise, two suicide bombings that killed 44 people at Coptic churches in Egypt on Palm Sunday raised the specter of increased sectarian bloodshed led by Islamic State militants.

    The attacks constituted one of the deadliest days of violence against Christians in Egypt in decades and presented a challenge to the authority of the country’s leader, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who promptly declared a three-month state of emergency.

    Security is the central promise of Mr. Sisi, a strongman leader who returned on Friday from a triumphant visit to the United States, where President Trump hailed him as a bulwark against Islamist violence. Mr. Trump made it clear that he was willing to overlook the record of mass detention, torture and extrajudicial killings during Mr. Sisi’s rule in favor of his ability to combat the Islamic State and defend minority Christians.

    On Sunday, Mr. Sisi found himself back on the defensive, deploying troops to protect churches across the country weeks before a planned visit by Pope Francis. Mr. Sisi rushed to assure Christians, who have traditionally been among his most vocal supporters and now fear that he cannot protect them against extremists.

    “I won’t say those who fell are Christian or Muslim,” Mr. Sisi said in a speech shown on state television on Sunday night. “I will say that they’re Egyptian.”

    One attack on Sunday struck at St. Mark’s Cathedral, the seat of the Coptic Church in Alexandria, where the bomber blew himself up at the church gates as the Coptic patriarch, Pope Tawadros II, led a Palm Sunday service inside.

    The other struck in the Nile Delta city of Tanta, where the attacker slipped past security to the front pews of the church and blew himself up, turning a religious celebration of joy into a ghastly scene of bloodshed and death.

    The Islamic State, which claimed responsibility for the attacks through its Aamaq news agency, signaled in December its intention to step up attacks on Christians when a suicide bombing at a major Cairo church killed at least 28 people. In February, hundreds of Christians fled their homes in north Sinai after a concerted campaign of assassination and intimidation in the area.

    Although Mr. Sisi had already stepped up security at churches, Sunday’s bloodshed underscores the difficulty of stopping suicide attacks. More starkly, it highlighted the failure of Egypt’s powerful intelligence agencies to anticipate a coordinated wave of devastating attacks.

    The explosion in Tanta, about 50 miles north of Cairo, occurred at St. George’s church, where the authorities had already sealed the main door to prevent attacks. The bomber managed to slip past security measures, including a metal detector, at one of the side doors, and blew himself up near the altar. At least 27 people were killed and 78 others injured, officials said.

    Children, their parents and deacons — lay Christians who help with the service — accounted for many of the dead.

    Hours later, victims’ relatives stood silently outside the city morgue, waiting to identify and collect the remains of their loved ones. The Rev. Daniel Maher, a priest who had been leading the Mass, was still wearing his bloodstained white vestments. The priest said he had not been harmed in the attack, but he lost his son, Bishoy, who was to get married later this year.

    “What can I say? Thank God,” he said in a cracking voice.

    Next to the priest, a young woman sat on the sidewalk, sobbing as a group of women tried to comfort her. “God, what did he do to deserve this?” she asked, bemoaning the loss of her own loved one.

    The second attack occurred just over two hours later in the coastal city of Alexandria, where a suicide bomber tried to enter St. Mark’s Cathedral.

    Surveillance footage, later aired on a private Egyptian television channel, showed a man wearing a bulky jacket being directed into a metal detector at the church gates, where he paused to be searched by a police officer. A moment later, a giant blast rang out. At least 17 people were killed, including a district police chief and a police officer, and an additional 48 were wounded, according to the Health Ministry.

    Pope Tawadros, who is due to meet with Pope Francis during his visit to Egypt at the end of this month, was not injured in the blast. He later issued a statement saying that “these acts will not harm the unity and cohesion of the people.”

    Christians make up about 10 percent of Egypt’s 90 million people, who are mostly Sunni Muslim, and have long complained of discrimination and sporadic violence at the hands of extremists. Christian leaders were vocal supporters of Mr. Sisi after he came to power in 2013 when the military ousted the elected president, Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Many Christians see Mr. Sisi as their defender, but Sunday’s events underscored how difficult it is for him to deliver on that promise, and raised pressing questions about security arrangements for Pope Francis’ visit on April 28 and 29.

    As forensics specialists combed through bloodstained wreckage at the site of the two church bombings, security officials found and defused explosive devices at other locations in Alexandria and Tanta, the state news media reported. Two devices were found at the Sidi Abdel Rahim Mosque in Tanta, home to one of the most famous Sufi Muslim shrines in the city, and another was found at the Collège St. Marc, an all-boys school in downtown Alexandria.

    Hours later, Mr. Sisi convened a meeting of the National Defense Council, which includes the prime minister and commanders of the Egyptian armed forces, in response to the bombings. He then declared a three-month state of emergency, though it was not immediately clear what extra powers he required, given that his government enjoys largely unfettered powers, has already imprisoned or exiled thousands of political opponents, and oversees a Parliament that is dominated by his supporters.

    In his televised speech, Mr. Sisi indicated that news media coverage of attacks that embarrass his authority could be restricted. “The media discourse has to be responsible,” he said. “It’s not acceptable to have the incident aired repeatedly on television stations all day.”

    Egyptians are used to such moves. The country was officially under a state of emergency for all of Hosni Mubarak’s 30-year rule, and again for three months in 2013.

    When Pope Francis arrives in Egypt, he will find a country where the Islamic State is intent on driving a wedge between Islam and Christianity.

    The pontiff offered his condolences to the Copts and all Egyptians, and in his statement from Rome he referred to the Coptic patriarch as his “brother.” Francis’ scheduled visit to Egypt has been billed as the latest step in a long-running effort to forge stronger ties between the Roman Catholic Church and Muslim leaders.

    Relations became strained in 2011 when Francis’s predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, denounced what he called “a strategy of violence that has Christians as a target” after a bombing at a church in Alexandria killed at least 23 people.

    Francis has sought to rebuild ties with Muslim clerics since becoming pope in 2013. And last year he welcomed to the Vatican Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of Al Azhar, a 1,000-year-old mosque and university that is revered by Sunni Muslims

    In Egypt, the pontiff is to visit with Mr. Sisi; the leadership of the Coptic Orthodox Church; and the grand imam.

    The grand imam condemned Sunday’s attacks as a “despicable terrorist bombing that targeted the lives of innocents.”

    For many Christians, though, the attacks at the start of the Holy Week before Easter are a harbinger of worse to come.

    “I think people will not only be too scared to be inside a church, they will be too scared to pass by one now,” said Mina Mansy, a prominent Christian rights activist. “This will continue to happen because the state is not interested in protecting Christians, or anyone else for that matter. The police’s only job is to crush political opponents. They don’t care about the real terrorists.”[50]

    [50] ‘Attacks on Christians in Egypt Undercut Sisi’s Promise of Security’ 2017, The New York Times, 9 April Accessed 10 April 2017 CXC9040665481

    16.  In April 2017, CNN reported on security fears for Christians in Egypt in light of recent attacks on churches:

    Fashil - "failed" -- that's how many Egyptians, particularly Coptic Christians, are describing their government's handling of security in Egypt in the aftermath of the Palm Sunday bombings in Alexandria and Tanta.

    The bombings, claimed by ISIS, left at least 43 dead and almost 120 wounded.

    Video posted on Facebook shows an angry crowd surrounding, then beating, Maj. Gen. Hussam Ad-Din Khalifa, director of security in Gharbiya Province -- where Tanta is located -- when he tried inspecting the damage at the Church of Mar Girgis, or St. George. Shortly afterward, President Abdel Fatah el-Sisi relieved Khalifa of his duties. Protesters in Alexandria are demanding the resignation of the interior minister.

    It's unlikely, however, that throwing one security official under the bus -- a favorite tactic of Egyptian rulers -- will remedy the profound shortcomings of Egyptian security, underscored by a long series of terror attacks in the country going back decades.

    Egypt's security apparatus is vast, including the regular police and an array of intelligence agencies with unknown budgets employing hundreds of thousands of uniformed officers and informers. Egyptian and international human rights groups have long accused Egypt's security services of wholesale abuse, torture and extrajudicial killings.

    And while some of them are true intelligence professionals, many more are poorly paid, poorly trained and poorly equipped.

    Mokhtar Awad, a research fellow in the George Washington University's Program on Extremism, said via email, "Generally Egyptian police rely on a large archaic network of human assets to detect threats, and do not invest in the proper training of security forces."

    After the suicide bombing of the "Butrusiya," the Church of St. Peter and Paul, in Cairo on December 11, 2016, worshipers accused the police of leaving their posts to have breakfast in their police van. A suicide bomber managed to slip into the church and blow himself up, killing 25 worshipers, mostly women.

    "This is a security regime that can be easily penetrated by ISIS-trained operatives," said Awad, a leading expert on the ISIS-led insurgency in Egypt. "Most of the security personnel staffing posts are largely untrained, uneducated, even illiterate conscripts."

    The starting salary for a police conscript is around $280, hardly enough to get by. As a result, it's common for men in uniform to try to supplement their incomes through fair means and foul. Security personnel at Cairo Airport often ask travelers for "haga halwa," something sweet, i.e. a bribe. Traffic police can be persuaded to let you break the rules for just a few Egyptian pounds.

    In the wake of these latest bombings, Sisi, formerly head of military intelligence, has declared the formation of a supreme council to counter terrorism and extremism, as well as a three-month state of emergency.

    Previous attacks have been followed by the sacking of senior intelligence officials, pledges to beef up security, roundups of the usual suspects. But the attacks have continued.

    And as long as those attacks continue, more and more Egyptians will conclude their security services are "fashil."[51]

    [51] ‘Analysis: Egyptians see failed security in church attacks’ 2017, CNN, 9 April Accessed 10 April 2017 CXC9040665529

    17.  In April 2017, the New Arab published the following in response to the same events and questioning the price Coptic Christians are paying for their support of the Sisi government:

    After the murder of seven Copts in February, and the release of a video from the Islamic State group's Egypt franchise threatening new attacks against Christians, more than 150 Christian families fled North Sinai, leaving only a handful of Christians behind.

    This came just two months after an attack against a Cairo church killed 28 Copts and wounded more than 50.

    Traumatised Copts are starting to question whether support for President Sisi is making them less safe. This is a crisis of confidence, not only in the regime, but in their own church leaders as well.

    Three years ago, things looked rather different. After a few turbulent years following the uprising against Mubarak, Hany, a young engineer from Alexandria was one of many Copts who looked forward to the election of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as president in May 2014:

    “Bad things happened under Morsi. Our people didn't feel safe. They could be attacked by Muslim terrorists any time. But now, now things will be good. Sisi is a wonderful man! He has already saved us from the Brotherhood. He will bring stability, he will bring back jobs, and he will bring back security for us Christians.”

    After leading the removal of President Morsi in the summer of 2013, then Defence Minister Sisi was viewed as a national saviour. Egyptian Copts overwhelmingly supported his rise to become Egypt's new strongman.

    Correspondingly, the Coptic Orthodox Church, led by Pope Tawadros II, offered its unstinting loyalty to the president. Based on early statements, Coptic hopes for the new president were sky high. They were hoping for a new beginning under Sisi's rule, for an end to religious discrimination, for equal treatment within the Egyptian legal system, and for protection from sectarian violence. 

    In each area they have been let down.

    Religious discrimination

    Under an Ottoman-era law, to which new restrictions were added in 1934, it has been near-impossible to build new churches or repair old ones without breaking the law. With a fast-growing population, Egyptian Copts have been forced to build churches illegally at the risk of having them demolished or vandalised.

    By contrast, the building of mosques is easily permitted, and often financed by the state. For decades, Egypt's Christians have waited for a new church law that would make it easier to build and repair churches with government permission.

    In August 2016, a new church law was passed by the Egyptian parliament after secret negotiations between government and church officials and other stakeholders. But those who hoped for an easier path to get church permits were bitterly disappointed.

    Under the new law, new church permits must be obtained from provisional governors, usually retired military officers who hold little regard for Coptic concerns, and who will most likely oppose the building of churches, citing "security concerns". This is especially the case in Upper Egypt, where Christian-Muslim relations are particularly tense.

    For Coptic Church leaders, who had expected some payback for their loyalty to the president, the new church law was a painful blow.

    Most importantly, it reflects a political reality in which the Egyptian government seeks to appease Muslim hardliners, even if this means brushing aside long-held and deep-seated concerns within Egypt's Coptic community. The same priorities seem to inform the government's handling of other challenges facing the Coptic community.

    The use of customary reconciliation

    Due to widespread social tensions between Christians and Islamist hardliners, especially in Upper Egypt, small conflicts involving people of different faiths often escalate and take on a sectarian character. A small-scale business dispute; an argument over a parking-lot; rumours that a private house is used as a place of worship, and most seriously; suspicions of an illicit affair between a man and a woman of different faith can escalate into violent confrontations, often ending up with one or more getting killed.

    As a general rule, Egyptian authorities refuse to refer such disputes to the court system, instead pressuring the parties to work out their differences through "customary reconciliation".

    Several studies have shown that with the use of customary reconciliation, Muslim perpetrators get off the hook, while the Coptic party end up on the losing side, often forcibly evicted from their land as a way of "resolving" a conflict. In some cases, entire family clans are evicted from their villages with no compensation for the loss of property.

    In a well-known case from the village of Beni Suef, a Coptic teenager posted anti-Islamic slogans on his Facebook wall, triggering a conflict that ended with his family being evicted from their home village.

    This policy leaves Egyptian Copts without any meaningful recourse within the Egyptian legal system, places them at risk of losing their property without compensation, and create impunity for many crimes committed against Copts.

    This policy is a hangover from Mubarak, one to which Copts hoped to see an end under Sisi's rule. Instead, customary reconciliation is used even more frequently, and to deal with ever more serious crimes than before, allowing violent criminals to act with impunity. This marks another area in which Egyptian Authorities seek to appease religious hardliners, rather than defend the rights of Egyptian Copts.

    Bishop Anba Makarios of El-Minya province has publically denounced the use of reconciliation sessions, and criticised the government for forcing them through. For the most part, however, the Coptic Orthodox Church has remained silent on the issue, as well as others of concern to lay Egyptian Copts, instead emphasising the importance of promoting national unity between Egyptian Copts and Muslims.

    The Coptic community has paid a price for its support of Sisi.

    In 2013, they were held partly responsible for Morsi's fall. In the two months that followed, and especially after the Rabaa massacre of August 14, in which more than 800 Morsi-supporters were killed by government forces, close to 150 Coptic churches were torched or destroyed, Coptic homes were vandalised, and individual Copts were killed.

    These attacks eventually abated, as Egyptian authorities clamped down on the Brotherhood with brutal force. The interim Egyptian government managed to restore some control of the country - and the Egyptian army, under Sisi, provided visible security around prominent Coptic churches.

    However, while the "political" violence against Copts ebbed out, communal violence -the kind of violence that is routinely addressed through reconciliation sessions - has grown more frequent and more severe. This has become a source of growing frustration within the Coptic community.

    Increasing sectarian violence

    In the face of government inaction on sectarian violence, and continued restrictions on the building of Coptic churches, people are losing faith in the church's strategy.

    On September 19, 2016, a list of prominent Copts in Egypt issued a joint statement criticising Pope Tawadros II for his public praise of President Sisi ahead of his visit to the UN General Assembly in New York. The statement warned that the church's support of the Egyptian state could harm Coptic communities in Upper Egypt who suffer from sectarian violence and discrimination.

    One of the signatories, researcher Ishaq Ibrahim, argued "the Coptic church's support of Sisi will result in negative outcomes for Copts" and "Islamists will have the chance to target Copts and say that [Copts] support the regime".

    The overall message was that continued support for President Sisi does not make Egyptian Copts more secure, it makes them more vulnerable to attacks from extremist forces, forces from which the regime is both unwilling and incapable of protecting them.

    The bombing of Peter and Paul's Church in Cairo in December 2016 further validated this view, and fuelled widespread Coptic anger towards the government. The church bombing prompted accusation of inadequate protection from state security forces, who had allowed 12 kilograms of explosives to be smuggled into the Cathedral compound, also the site of the Pope's headquarters.

    Swift efforts to hunt down and arrest the alleged men behind the attack did little to stem Coptic resentment.

    Since then, Egyptian Copts have been the targets of new forms of attacks, with some being killed in their own homes, and others in public places at broad daylight. A wave of killings in the town of Arish was followed by the release of a video by the Islamic State group's local branch.

    In the video, they claim responsibility for the Cairo church attack in December, and threaten to keep killing Christians throughout Egypt, to whom they refer as "infidels" who "empower the West against Muslims".

    With Christians leaving North Sinai in large numbers, the government has received harsh criticism for its failure to protect them, but also for its pitiful efforts in helping them find food and shelter elsewhere. One sign of growing discontent among those who have fled Sinai and among Copts in other parts of the country is an unwillingness to accommodate a discourse of "national unity" peddled by both state and church officials in the wake of sectarian attacks.

    While Egyptian authorities struggle to regain control of North Sinai, and to contain the threat posed by militants, Egyptian Copts are re-examining their own relationship with the regime, as well as the authority of their own pope.

    If the Coptic Church is unwilling to reevaluate its own relationship with the regime, and find ways to communicate the concerns of its laity, more popular anger may be directed towards the church itself.[52]

    [52] ‘Are Copts at risk because of their Sisi support?’ 2017, The New Arab, 14 March Accessed 16 March 2017 CXC9040663760

    18.  The May 2017 DFAT Country Information Report on Egypt[53] indicates that Coptic Christians have experienced a changed security situation in Egypt:

    2.30Since December 2016, the Islamic State terrorist organisation has claimed responsibility for a series of major attacks targeting Coptic Christian churches. On 11 December 2016, an Islamic State suicide bomber targeted a church service in Cairo, killing 29 and injuring 49. On 19 February 2017, a group calling itself ‘IS Egypt’ released a video calling for the targeting of Coptic Christians. Two major attacks against Palm Sunday church services occurred on 9 April, both claimed by Islamic State. The first attack occurred in Tanta, killing 27 and injuring 70. The second occurred at St. Mark’s Cathedral in Alexandria, the historical seat of the Coptic Pope, killing at least 16 and injuring 66. Pope Tawadros, head of the Coptic Church, was delivering a service at the cathedral at the time, but escaped unharmed. In addition to these attacks on churches, around 154 Christian families fled the northern Sinai town of Al-Arish in January-February 2017 after seven Coptic Christians were reportedly killed by Islamic State-affiliated militants. The Grand Imam of al-Azhar strongly condemned the church attacks, while a faction of the Brotherhood also issued a statement of condemnation.

    2.31In response to the Palm Sunday bombings, Sisi issued a Presidential Decree on 9 April 2017 declaring a nation-wide state of emergency, the first under the 2014 Constitution. The decree was passed unanimously by Parliament on 11 April. The state of emergency is governed by Law 162 of 1958, ‘The Emergency Law’. While the exact details of the Emergency Law and how it will be applied were unclear at the publication date, it is likely that the military will be granted extended powers. DFAT assess that detentions and arrests are likely to increase as a result of the declaration of a nation-wide state of emergency.

    [53] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2017, DFAT Country Information Report- Egypt, 19 May

    19.  The Tribunal has also noted a recent media release in May 2017 by the Australian Government in relation to the government’s strong support for Coptic Christians:

    The Turnbull Government continues to support Coptic Christians who have been assessed as being owed protection through the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme. Updated country information received by the Government in recent days highlights the violence Copts are facing at the hands of Islamic State terrorists.

    Since 2013, over 550 protection visas have been granted. Minister Dutton and Assistant Minister Hawke have also intervened in a total of 70 cases to grant visas over the last year.

    Immediately following the horrific attacks on 26th May, Prime Minister Turnbull expressed his condolences to the Coptic Christian community in Australia, “The loss of more followers of the Coptic Christian faith to terrorism is felt deeply by the rest of the Australian community. Australia stands united with the Coptic Christians in shared resolve to eradicate the scourge of terrorism,” the Prime Minister said.

    Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Alex Hawke is reviewing all protection applications by Coptic Christians that have been refused by both the Department and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

    “The Government will carefully assess cases of Coptic Christians in Australia during this period of emergency in Egypt. Copts in Australia will have an appropriate visa during this period to remain lawfully here,” Mr Hawke said.

    “The Government actively monitors and updates country information and will continue to work with the Coptic community, the local Coptic Church, the Australian Embassy in Egypt and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to ensure immigration decisions reflect the current situation in Egypt…[54]

    Blasphemy and defamation of religion

    [54] Government continues strong support for Coptic Christians, 31 May 2017

    20.  In relation to blasphemy and defamation of religion, the Tribunal has considered country information in the UK Home Office Country Policy and Information Note Egypt: Christians[55]:

    [55] UK Home Office Country Policy and Information Note Egypt: Christians, November 2016

    5.2.1    The 2016 USCIRF report noted that:

    ‘Article 98(f) of the Egyptian Penal Code prohibits citizens from “ridiculing or insulting heavenly religions or inciting sectarian strife.” Authorities use this “contempt-of-religion,” or blasphemy law to detain, prosecute and imprison members of religious groups whose practices deviate from mainstream Islamic beliefs or whose activities are alleged to jeopardize “communal harmony” or insult Judaism, Christianity or Islam.’ [56]

    [56] United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) 2016 Annual Report: Egypt, Background and Egypt’s Constitution, April 2016, 2016 Annual Report.pdf accessed: 21 Sep 2016  

    5.2.2 According to Mada Masr, an online Egyptian newspaper in their article, Four Coptic Teenagers Tried for Insulting Religion:

    ‘International organisations like the New York-based Human Rights Watch have criticized Egypt’s blasphemy laws, saying they curtail freedom of expression, which is guaranteed by the Egyptian Constitution. There have been a number of blasphemy cases in recent months. Poet, journalist and ex-parliamentary candidate Fatima Naoot was sentenced to three years in prison and a LE20,000 fine for contempt of religion. Naoot was tried for criticizing the tradition of sacrificing animals during Eid al-Adha in a Facebook post.’

    ‘...In another recent case, TV host and preacher Islam al-Beheiry was sentenced to a year in prison for insulting Islam on his controversial TV show “With Islam.” Ibrahim hopes the prominent and well-publicized cases of Naoot and Beheiry will spark outrage and create public pressure to change Egypt’s blasphemy laws.’[57] …

    [57] Mada Masr, Four Coptic Teenagers Tried for Insulting Religion, 31 January 2016, accessed: 10 Oct 2016 

    5.3.1    The 2015 DFAT Thematic Report on Egyptian Copts noted:

    ‘There is no statutory prohibition on conversion from Islam to other religions in Egypt. However, officials — including courts — frequently interpret sharia as prohibiting Muslims from converting to another religion and refuse to recognise such conversions legally. By contrast, converts to Islam will generally have their conversions recognised, and their identity cards changed accordingly without difficulty or delay.’[58]

    5.3.2 The same report noted that:

    ‘In addition, converts from Islam face significant societal discrimination in the form of rejection and ostracism from their families or communities. Such discrimination tends to be worse in poorer or rural areas, where more conservative values are tightly held. The level of discrimination would likely increase if the convert undertakes activities, such as proselytising, in relation to his or her conversion. There have been instances where converts from Islam have been accused of defamation of religion.’17

    5.3.3 According to the U.S Department of State, International Religious Freedom (IRF) Report 2015:

    ‘The government does not recognize conversion from Islam by citizens born Muslim to any other religion and imposes legal penalties on Muslim-born citizens who convert. While there is no legal ban on efforts to proselytize Muslims, the government uses the penal code’s prohibition of “denigrating religions” to prosecute those who proselytize publicly, often adopting an overly expansive interpretation of denigration, according to human rights groups. The constitution specifies Islam as the state religion and the principles of Sharia as the primary source of legislation.’

    ‘...While neither the Constitution or the civil or penal codes prohibit efforts to proselytize Muslims, according to a 2008 court ruling that tested the constitutional provision of religious freedom, conversion from Islam is apostasy and forbidden based on principles of Sharia..…The government generally tolerated foreign religious workers on the condition they did not undertake efforts to proselytize Muslims. Sources stated non-Muslim minorities and foreign religious workers generally refrained from proselytizing to avoid risking legal penalties and extra-legal repercussions from authorities and local Islamists.’[59]

    [58] Australian Government, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Thematic Reports, Egyptian

    Copts, Section 3: Refugee Convention Claims, Paragraphs 3.10 to 3.13, 24 November 2015, accessed: 18 Oct 2016 

    [59] United States Department of State International Religious Freedom Report 2015 Egypt, Section 2 – Legal Framework and Government Practices, April 2016 accessed: 14 Sep 2016 

    State Protection

    21.  According to the UK Home Office Policy and Information Note Egypt: Christians[60] the following is noted regarding state protection:

    [60] UK Home Office Country Policy and Information Note Egypt: Christians, November 2016

    6.5.5 The U.S Department of State, International Religious Freedom Report 2015 has said that:

    ‘The government frequently failed to prevent, investigate or prosecute crimes targeting members of religious minority groups, which fostered a climate of impunity, according to a prominent local rights organisation. The government often failed to protect Christians targeted by kidnappings and extortion according to sources in the Christian community, and there were reports that security and police officials sometimes failed to respond to these crimes, especially in Upper Egypt’.[61] …

    [61] United States Department of State International Religious Freedom Report 2015 Egypt, Government Practices, April 2016 accessed: 19 Sep 2016 

    6.5.10 According to Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada in a response Egypt: Situation of Coptic Christians, including treatment; state protection available (2014-May 2015), citing a range of sources:

    ‘According to the Assistant Professor, "witnesses often say that the [authorities'] response is more about calming the situation down than investigating and locating the people responsible" (Assistant Professor 14 April 2015). Similarly, the Professor stated that this pattern of response tends to settle tensions for a time, but is "not a permanent solution" to the problems of sectarian violence (Professor 17 April 2015).’[62]

    [62] Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Egypt: Situation of Coptic Christians, including treatment; state protection available (2014-May 2015), 8 May 2015 accessed: 16 Sep 2016