1500231 (Refugee)

[2016] AATA 4723

1500231 (Refugee) [2016] AATA 4723 (16 November 2016)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1500231

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                  Egypt

MEMBER:Roslyn Smidt

DATE:16 November 2016

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.

Statement made on 16 November 2016 at 3:55pm

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 applicant a Protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicant, who is a citizen of Egypt, applied for the visa [in] May 2014 and the delegate refused to grant the visa [in] December 2014.

3. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 27 October 2016 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic and English languages.

4. The applicant was represented in relation to the review by his registered migration agent.

   THE RELEVANT LAW

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.

   CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

   Background

10. The applicant is a [age] year old man from Cairo in Egypt. At the hearing he stated that he had attended university in Egypt for 4 years between [years]. He graduated with a [degree] and worked in a firm which was well known in his area. He originally intended to pursue a [certain] career, but later changed his mind. His father worked for [a] company and he sometimes accompanied him to the office. He decided that he would prefer to work as an [occupation] for the [company] and his father told him that if he obtained appropriate qualifications he could help him to achieve this goal.

11. The applicant first arrived in Australia as a student [in] January 2008. He obtained [further] student visas which remained valid until December 2015.

12. The applicant returned to Egypt from August to October 2008, August 2010 to November 2010, August 2012 to November 2012 and [November] 2013 to [March] 2014. At the hearing he said that he had gone to Egypt in 2010 to visit his father who was ill. On the most recent visit he married. He and his wife have one child. He travelled to [country] in May 2016 to spend time with his wife and child.

13. At the hearing the applicant stated that he had come to Australia to study in order to improve his employment prospects in Egypt. He confirmed that he was specifically interested in obtaining a qualification in [occupation].  He confirmed that he had enrolled in about [number] short courses including English courses and courses on [various [subjects]. He said that he had only completed four of these courses, two English language courses which he completed in 2010 or 2011, a [course] in 2012 and [another course] in 2013. He said that he had changed courses on a number of occasions because after enrolling he discovered that he did not like the course or was not benefiting from it. In addition his father passed away in 2013 and as his father would not be able to help him to get a job at the [company] he decided to study [another course].

    Summary of claims and issues to be determined

14. The applicant claims that while he remains a Muslim and believes that the Koran is the word of God, he rejects the authority of hadiths[1] and no longer considers himself a Sunni and does not follow the traditional practises of Sunni Islam. He claims that the Koran requires him to speak out about his views and he will do this if he returns to Egypt. He claims that this will place him at risk of being arrested or killed if he returns home.

    [1] Hadiths are a collection of traditions containing sayings attributed to Muhammad which, with accounts of his daily practise (the Sunna), constitute the major source of guidance for Muslims apart from the Koran.

    Protection visa application

15. In his protection visa application lodged [in] May 2014 the applicant said that he came from a moderate Muslim family and he had experienced many problems with his lecturers while at university because he disagreed with them on a number of issues, particularly relating to hadiths. He gained a reputation as a doubter of the word of Allah and had to be careful not to voice his opinion.

16. After arriving in Australia in 2008 the applicant continued to practise his religion, but also continued to move away from Sunni Islam. After each visit to Egypt his views were more relaxed and he was more willing to express these views, but he was forced to practise Sunni Islam. He experienced some problems during his first three trips to Egypt because of his views, particularly with his family and sheikhs. He was involved in heated arguments. During his 2012 visit he had discussions with a friend called [Mr A] which resulted in a physical fight during which he suffered slight physical harm. After this he began to put aside his religious conditioning and started to read about Islam and look at different opinions on the internet. He was surprised to find that other people shared his views.  He began to discuss his views with a man [who] disagreed with him but helped him to organise his thoughts.

17. When the applicant returned to Egypt in 2013 he was not totally accepting of the Sunni Hadiths and had not gone to Mosque for about 8 months. He was mentally convinced that he has rejected the Hadiths, but had difficulty stating confidently that he believed only in the Koran.

18. The applicant married his wife according to Sunni Islamic traditions and laws in 2013.  He was very uncomfortable about the religious aspects of his wedding ceremony, but kept quiet because of cultural pressures. After the wedding he made the final emotional and spiritual transition to the belief that only the Koran should be believed and accepted. He told his wife about his views. She became very upset, threatened to tell his family and demanded a divorce. He found it increasingly difficult to pretend that he was still a follower of Sunni Islam, but he could not speak out about his views. For the last two weeks of his stay in Egypt he pretended to be ill so he would not have to go to the Mosque. His in-laws became upset about his religious views. On the flight back to Australia he finally felt strong enough to say that he was no longer a Sunni and believed only in the Koran.

19. During his Department interview [in] September 2014 the applicant again said that he had started to question Sunni Islam when he was at university because he was concerned that the hadiths were often at odds with Koran. For example, the Koran forbids adultery, but the hadiths permit it. The Koran says nothing about the number of times Muslims should pray, but the hadiths say it must be five times a day. In addition he disagreed with Islamic scholars who said that only Muslims could access the Kaaba [the main holy site in Mecca] and that Mohammad was above other prophets, which he believed was at odds with Koran. He said that he had questioned his teachers and the local Sheikh about these differences.  The delegate observed that no harm had come to him for expressing these views. The applicant said he had not held strong views about the role of the Koran and the hadiths at that time.

20. The applicant said after researching contradictions between the Koran and hadiths on the internet he arrived at the firm belief that Muslims should only follow the Koran in January or February 2014 while in Egypt. However, it was not until after he returned to Australia in March 2014 that he fully formulated his views.

21. The applicant said that he practised his own version of Islam by reading the Koran and praying to God. He also said that he spoke to people about the correct way to read the Koran and helped them to reach the truth. He said that he knew his interpretation of the Koran was the correct one because God had given him the wisdom to be able to understand how the Koran should be read. He added that the Koran was self-explanatory and did not need interpretation. He added that the Koran did not contain any indication that Mohammad’s followers should listen to the interpretations of others and said that many of the hadiths contradicted the Koran.

22. The applicant said that he was aware of some online groups which discussed religion, but he was not part these groups of any religious group in Australia or elsewhere. He said that in Australia he was able to speak to many people about religion, but he had never posted his views online.

23. The delegate suggested that the applicant’s views appeared to be the same as a group of Muslims referred to as Koranists and advised him that information from DFAT suggested that Koranists were not generally at risk of serious discrimination or violence in Egypt. The applicant said that he was aware of the existence of this group, but he was not part of it because he did not want to belong to any group. He also said that members of the group had been arrested in Egypt in 2007 and 2009[2].

    [2] According to a New York Times report a young Koranist blogger was arrested on in October 2008 and charged with "insulting Islam" after refusing to take down his popular blog which criticized the religious establishment and called for widespread religious and political reform in Egypt and the Muslim world. Ahmed Subhy Mansour, Egypt persecutes Muslim moderates

24. The applicant said that his family and parents-in-law knew about his way of thinking because he had discussed his views with them when he was in Egypt in early 2013. However, they became very upset so he told them he had returned to the proper path. Since then he has lied to them about his views.  He said that his family would reject and possibly harm him if he returned to Egypt and openly expressed his true opinions. When the delegate pointed out that he had previously stated that his family were moderate Muslims he responded that they would have to conform to the norms of Egyptian society.

25. The applicant said he also discussed his views with his wife in 2013. She said he was an infidel and she wanted a divorce. He calmed things down in order to avoid divorce.  However, following his arrival in Australia he continued to speak to his wife about his views and she now agrees with most of his ideas.

26. The applicant claimed that he had engaged in discussions about his religious views in Australia with social contacts and said that he would continue to express his views because God required him to do this. The delegate observed that he had not told his family the truth about his views and suggested that this indicated that he would not discuss his views with others in Egypt. The applicant responded that families were different and he did not want to upset his mother who was elderly and unwell. He said that he had spoken to his siblings, but they had rejected his views and they believed that he was still a Sunni. The delegate also observed that he had only spoken to social contacts in an informal way in Australia which did not suggest that he would engage in other kinds of activities aimed at spreading his views in Egypt. The applicant maintained he would do his best to spread his views in Egypt.

    Review application

27. No written submissions were received prior to the hearing. He attended a hearing on 27 October 2016. The following summary does not always follow the order in which his evidence was provided during the hearing.

28. The applicant confirmed that he came from a moderate Sunni family. Prior to leaving Egypt he practised Islam in the same way as other Sunni Muslims, including members of his family. He prayed, went to Mosque on Fridays and fasted during Ramadan.

29. The applicant again stated he had had some concerns about differences between some hadiths and the Koran before coming to Australia. For example, he was concerned that the Koran said that adultery was forbidden, but some hadiths permitted a couple to have sex for three nights without being married. Hadiths also forbade marriage between a Muslim woman and a Christian man and the wearing of gold, neither of which is forbidden in the Koran. He wanted to understand why this was and towards the end of his [studies] he began to ask his teachers for an explanation. They did not provide an explanation, but told him not to question tradition. Later some of the teachers and his fellow students said he was becoming an infidel so he stopped expressing his views because he was fearful that he might be arrested or even killed. 

30. The applicant said that after he finished his studies he occasionally spoke to the sheikhs at his mosque about his views. The sheikhs did not answer his questions and told him to follow tradition. He did not face any problems because of this, but the sheikhs began to look at him in a bad way, so about 6 months before he left Egypt he stopped asking questions.

31. The applicant said that he had also spoken to his family and his employers about some of his concerns before coming to Australia, but it was clear that nobody wanted to discuss these matters and he stopped asking questions because he was concerned that he would get a bad reputation and possibly cause problems for his family.

32. The applicant said that when he arrived in Australia he was not greatly concerned about religious issues. He intended to study and live a normal life. He continued to practise Sunni Islam in the normal way, attending Mosque on Fridays and sometimes on other days. However, towards the end of 2012 he began to search the internet for information and to see whether he was on the right path. He discovered that other people shared his views. In about March 2013 he had a fierce argument with an old man at the Mosque over the wording of the call to prayer and why Mohammad is honoured over other prophets and stopped attending Mosque to avoid further confrontation. He had almost no contact with other people from the Mosque following this, although he spoke to some by telephone.

33. I asked the applicant to tell me three main reasons he decided to abandon Sunni Islam. He said that he objected to the fact that Sunni Hadiths mentioned only Mohammad and that the Kaaba was not available to people of all religions. He added that the Koran said nothing about the number of times Muslims should pray or how many times they should kneel when praying but it was tradition to kneel four times when praying at a Mosque, but only two when praying at home. He said that he believed that the Koran was given by God and was perfect and that he believed that followers of Islam could pray to God in any way they wished. He said that he did not want to go to Mosque and wanted to practise his religion individually according to his own beliefs.

34. When asked, the applicant said he had continued to attend Mosque every Friday when he visited Egypt before 2013. When asked if he had discussed religion with anyone during these visits he said that he had spoken to a friend, to his family and to his wife.  I noted that he had not been married when he visited prior to his visit in 2013 and asked again if he had spoken to anyone about religion prior to the 2013 visit. He said that he had not discussed religion with anyone during these visits because he did not want to have any problems.

35. Later in the hearing I reminded the applicant that he had previously claimed that he had discussed religion with a friend called [Mr A] in 2012 and they had fought because of this, which was at odds with his evidence to me earlier in the hearing when he told me he had not spoken to anyone or faced any problems during his visits prior to 2013. The applicant said that he had mentioned speaking to his friend, but not by name. He added that it was because of his dispute with [Mr A] that he began to seriously question Sunni practises. I observed that even if he had briefly mentioned speaking to his friend in 2012 I found it surprising that he had not provided a full account of this incident as it appeared to be a significant event. 

36. Following the hearing I reviewed the recording. As set out above, when I first asked the applicant about his pre-2013 visits to Egypt he said that he had spoken to a friend. However, when I asked him to clarify his answer as he also claimed he had spoken to his wife during this visit suggesting he was referring to  his visit in 2013, he stated clearly that he had not spoken to anyone prior to 2013.

37. The applicant’s confirmed that he had gone to Egypt in November in 2013 to get married. He said that he had gone to the Mosque on Fridays under pressure and said that he sometimes pretended to be tired and did not attend and confirmed that he had married his wife according to Sunni traditions and laws.

38. I asked the applicant if he had experienced any problems during the five months he was in Egypt in 2013 and 2014. He said that when he told his wife about his beliefs she was shocked and told her parents and his parents and asked for a divorce. Because he was concerned about his elderly mother’s health he retracted his statements. He said that he had not spoken to anyone else about his views while he was in Egypt because he was afraid that he would have to divorce his wife and that he would be seen as an infidel and his mother would suffer because of this.

1. I asked that applicant what he feared would happen to him if he returned to Egypt now. He said that he believed he would be imprisoned by the government or killed as this was what happened to people who held views like his. He said that a man called Islam el-Behery had been charged with contempt of religion and jailed because he said that Hadiths contradicted the Koran and were not reliable.

2. Following the hearing I sought further information regarding Islam el-Behery. According to articles in the Cairo Post and Yahoo News[3] a Muslim scholar named Islam el-Behery was sentenced to 5 years jail in May 2015 for defaming Islam after he questioned the credibility of the sources of the Hadith and called for reform of Islam on a daily TV shot he hosted called “With Islam”.  According to the article others including President Sisi were also calling for reforms to aspects of Islam but by Al-Azhar, Egypt’s foremost Muslim Sunni authority brought a law suit again Islam el-Behery because in their view his comments did not merely call for reform but insulted Islamic heritage. The sentence was reduced to a year on appeal.

   [3] Islam Behery sentenced to five years in prison 31 May 2015 and AFP December 30, 2015 Egypt jails Muslim scholar for insulting Islam >

   I asked if the applicant when he had become aware that he might be killed if he expressed his views on religion in Egypt. He said that he had obtained this information when researching on the internet. I asked him why he had decided to return to Egypt in November 2013 to marry a Sunni woman according to Sunni traditions if he no longer believed in Sunni traditions and believed he should speak to others about these views, but also believed he would be killed if he did so. I observed that he could have remained in Australia and sought protection if he feared he would be killed in Egypt because of his views on religion.

3. The applicant said that he had been convinced in his mind and his thoughts that he should speak out about his views when he visited in 2013, but not in his heart or spirit. He said he had objected to the Sunni form of marriage and had told his family about his objection, but agreed to follow tradition to please his mother.  I advised him that it was my understanding that in Egypt religious institutions had control of issues such as marriage and if he wanted to marry it would have to be in accordance with Sunni traditions. The applicant responded that he had not given much thought to this issue before he went to Egypt, but he had objected to the fact that his wife had to say “I marry you according to  the way of  Imam Abu Hanifa” or some other Imam rather than according to the book of God.

4. I advised the applicant that his decision to visit Egypt in November 2013 might cause me to doubt that he was genuinely fearful that he would be harmed because he held unacceptable religious views and that his failure to speak about these views during that visit might cause me to doubt that he would speak out in the manner claimed if he returned now.  The applicant maintained that while he had not been prepared to fully renounce Sunni Islam before he went to Egypt, he had done so now and because of his beliefs he would be compelled to speak to others about his views and encourage them to follow his path if he returned to Egypt.

5. The applicant said that he had spoken to friends and acquaintances in Australia about his views.  He said that even while travelling on trains he would strike up a conversation with people and when the time seemed right he would speak to them about his beliefs about religion. He did not ask the people to whom he spoke about their religion. He provided three letters, two written in 2014 and one in 2016, all of which state that the applicant had spoken to them about his beliefs regarding Islam and that his views were at odds with mainstream Islam ideas. He confirmed that these letters were from personal friends.

6. I advised the applicant that I was aware that Sunni Islam was the dominant religion in Egypt and people who were seen as insulting or defaming Islam could be charged with an offence, I was not aware of evidence that they were likely to be killed because of this and the evidence did not appear to suggest that he would face serious harm if he returned to Egypt because he no longer considered himself to be a Sunni Muslim.  I noted that information contained in a report from the PEW Research Centre[4] indicated that about 12% of Egyptians identified themselves as “just Muslim” rather than “Sunni Muslim” which suggested that the mere fact that Egyptian Muslims did not identify themselves as Sunni was not likely to cause serious problems. The applicant said that he would be outspoken about his views and that he would face serious harm because of this.

   [4] "Chapter 1: Religious Affiliation". The World’s Muslims: Unity and Diversity. Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. 9 August 2012. Retrieved 4 September 2013.

7. I noted that the applicant had been in Australia as a student since 2008 and had enrolled in some [courses], but he had only completed about four. I noted that he had a [degree] and had worked at his profession in Egypt while the courses he had undertaken in Australia were relatively low level and appeared unlikely to greatly improve his employment prospects in Egypt. I observed that this could suggest that his main concern was to find ways to remain in Australia. The applicant said that after his father died in 2010 he had become aimless and depressed and drifted from course to course. I asked why he had not returned to Egypt at that time. He did not respond to this question but said that if he returned now he would be viewed as an infidel.

   Country information

8. The following information is intended to provide a context for the considering the applicant’s claims. Unless otherwise states it is based on DFAT Country Information Report Egypt  24 November 2015

9. Religion is central to identity in Egypt. The Constitution officially recognises Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Unrecognised religions such as Baha’ism are not banned, but the lack of recognition creates difficulties for personal status matters and obtaining identity documents. Personal status issues such as marriage are delegated to religious institutions. There is no civil marriage in Egypt, the state administers marriages between Muslims in accordance with sharia.

10. There is no statutory prohibition on conversion from Islam to other religions in Egypt. However, in practise, officials and courts frequently interpret sharia as prohibiting such conversions.  Converts from Islam to other religions are not generally subject to officially sanctioned violence, detention or surveillance. However, they encounter significant practical difficulties amounting to a high degree of official discrimination. In addition, converts from Islam face significant societal which tends to be worse in poorer or rural areas or when the convert undertakes activities, such as proselytization.

11. Articles 98(f), 160 and 161 of the Egyptian Criminal Code (Law 58–1937) prohibit citizens from “ridiculing or insulting heavenly religions or inciting sectarian strife”. The law applies to all Egyptians and all recognised religions, but in practise disproportionately affects individuals accused of defaming Islam. Before 2011, few people were charged with defamation of religion and Most of those charged were public figures such as authors, publishers and journalists. Since the January 2011 revolution, over 70 people have been charged and/or tried for defaming. The Sisi Government has continued to enforce measures to counter atheism, blasphemy and dissent.

12. According to DFAT[5], Koranists hold views similar to those expressed by the applicant. They are very few in number and not recognised as legitimate denomination of Islam in Egypt. They identify as Muslims and mostly refrain for revealing their views publicly due to widespread societal distrust. During the Mubarak era there were a number of arrests of Koranists, but DFAT is unaware of any killings of Koranists or of any arrests since the July 2013 military intervention. DFAT assesses a Koranist would face the same level of discrimination as Shias in Egypt. This could include employment insecurity (from private sector jobs) and other forms of societal discrimination, but is unlikely to involve violence. Furthermore, the likelihood and severity of discrimination would be heavily dependent on the education levels and socio-economic situation of their neighbours, with significant harassment being unlikely in urban middle class areas.

    [5] DFAT Country Report Egypt 28 January 2014

13. According to a 2009 New York Times report[6] a young Koranist blogger was arrested in October 2008 and charged with "insulting Islam" after refusing to take down his popular blog which criticized the religious establishment and called for widespread religious and political reform in Egypt and the Muslim world.

    [6] Ahmed Subhy Mansour, Egypt persecutes Muslim moderates 3 February 2009 

    CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICANT’S CLAIMS FOR PROTECTION UNDER S.36(2) A (REFUGEE STATUS)

14. The applicant has consistently claimed that he has rejected Sunni hadiths and traditions and no longer considers himself to be a Sunni Muslim. He claims to follow only the Koran and states that he believes the Koran requires him to speak to others about his beliefs and try to persuade them to take a similar path. He claims he will act according to these beliefs if he returns to Egypt and that this will place him at risk of being killed or suffering other forms of serious or significant harm.  For the reasons set out below I do not accept these claims.

15. At hearing that applicant said that he had ceased attending the Mosque about 8 or 9 months before he travelled to Egypt in 2013 and that he was convinced in his mind and his thoughts that his new beliefs on religion were correct prior to this trip. However, he attended Sunni Mosques, married a Sunni woman according to Sunni traditions and spoke to nobody but his wife about his new beliefs. If the applicant had genuinely abandoned Sunni Islam and felt obliged to speak out about his beliefs then he would surely have done so during this trip. However, he failed to do so and I do not accept that he has abandoned his Sunni faith or that he would criticise traditional Sunni beliefs and encourage others to change their religious beliefs and practises if he returned to Egypt.

16. In reaching this conclusion I have noted the applicant’s claim that while he was convinced in his mind and thoughts that he was no longer a Sunni and had to try and convince others to adopt his new religious beliefs in November 2013 he was not ready for a complete break from his old religion in his heart and his spirit. I do not accept this explanation. When his 2013 visit to Egypt was discussed at the hearing he said that he had attended a Sunni mosque, married according to Sunni traditions and refrained from speaking to anyone about his new beliefs not because he had any doubts about his new beliefs, but because he did not want to upset his mother or cause her problems and because he did not want his wife to divorce him.

17. While the findings set out above are sufficient for me to reject the applicants claims regarding this religious beliefs and the problems they would cause him if he returned to Egypt, I note that he has also provided differing accounts of his experiences during his visits to Egypt prior to 2013.

18. In the written submission provided to the Department of Immigration [in] May 2014 he said that he had experienced problems with a number of people during these visits and that he had been slightly injured when he fought with a friend because of disagreements about religion in 2012. However, when asked about these visits during the hearing he said that he had not spoken to anyone about his views as he did not want to cause problems. While I acknowledge that the applicant mentioned speaking to a friend when first asked about these visits, when asked for clarification he stated clearly and firmly that he had not spoken to anyone. If the applicant had experienced problems of even a minor nature during these visits I believe he would have spoken about them when asked this question at the hearing. In particular I do not believe he would have failed to provide information on the 2012 fight with a friend during which he claims to have been slightly injured and which he claims was a significant factor in his decision to move further away from Sunni Islam ultimately abandoning his faith. I find these inconsistencies a strong indication that the applicant has not provided honest evidence regarding his beliefs or his experiences in Egypt.

19. Finally, the applicant’s prolonged stay in Australia as a student during which he failed to complete more than four low level courses, is at odds with his claim that he gave up his job as a [profession] to study in Australia to change career paths and enhance his employment prospects in Egypt. While I accept that the applicant was depressed and confused after his father’s death in 2012, overall I find his migration history is suggestive of someone seeking to find a way to remain in Australia. While I would not have rejected the applicant’s claims for this reason alone, considered in light of the findings set out above, I find it a further indication that he lodged an application for protection in order to remain in Australia, not because he feared serious or significant harm in Egypt.

20. After considering all of the relevant evidence I do not accept that the applicant has abandoned Sunni Islam or that he would speak out and seek to persuade other Sunnis to follow a similar path if he returned to Egypt. I find that he concocted these claims to support his application for protection in Australia.  I am therefore not satisfied that he faces a real chance of facing serious harm on return to Egypt because of he has abandoned Sunni Islam or because he will speak out about his beliefs if he returns to Egypt.

21. In reaching this conclusion I have considered the letters provided by the applicant regarding his activities in Australia. However, these letters were written by the applicant’s personal friends and contain claims which I have rejected. I have given them no weight.

22. I have also noted the applicant’s claim that he was viewed with suspicion prior to his departure from Egypt in 2008 because he questioned his teachers, the sheikhs at his mosque and others about Sunni hadiths which he had difficulty accepting.  Given the applicant’s willingness to concoct claims to support his application for protection I also find these claims to be lacking in credibility.

23. After considering the applicant’s claims singly and cumulatively and taking account of all the relevant evidence, I am not satisfied that there is a real chance that he will suffer serious harm amounting to persecution in the reasonably foreseeable future for a Convention reason if he returns to Egypt and therefore I do not accept that he has a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason.  I am not satisfied that he is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention and he therefore does not satisfy the criteria set out in s.36(2)a.

    CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICANT’S CLAIMS UNDER S.36(2)(aa) (COMPLEMENTARY PROTECTION )

24. The applicant’s application for complementary protection relies on the same claims as those put forward in his refugee application. As discussed above, I did not find the applicant to be a credible witness and I do not accept these claims. As a result, there is no credible evidence before me which suggests that there is a real risk that he will suffer significant harm if he returns to Egypt.

    Findings in relation to s.36(2)(aa)

25. After considering the applicant’s claims singly and cumulatively and taking account of all the relevant evidence, I am not satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence being removed from Australia to Egypt there is a real risk that he will suffer significant harm

    CONCLUDING PARAGRAPHS

26. For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention. Therefore the applicant does not satisfy the criterion set out in s.36(2)(a).

27. Having concluded that the applicant does not meet the refugee criterion in s.36(2)(a), the Tribunal has considered the alternative criterion in s.36(2)(aa). The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s.36(2)(aa).

28. There is no suggestion that the applicant satisfies s.36(2) on the basis of being a member of the same family unit as a person who satisfies s.36(2)(a) or (aa) and who holds a protection visa. Accordingly, the applicant does not satisfy the criterion in s.36(2).

    DECISION

29. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.

    Roslyn Smidt

    
    

    Member

    
    

3 February 2009