1509417 (Refugee)

[2017] AATA 1485

1509417 (Refugee) [2017] AATA 1485 (17 August 2017)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1509417

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                  Egypt

MEMBER:Sophia Panagiotidis

DATE:17 August 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 August 2017 at 5:45pm

CATCHWORDS

Refugee – Protection visa – Egypt – Religion – Coptic Christian – Past harm and discrimination – No effective State protection – Relocation not a solution – Country information indicates increase in sectarian violence

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 36, 65, 91R, 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] July 2012 and the delegate refused to grant the visas [in] June 2015.

3. The applicants appeared before the Tribunal on 2 November 2016 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from [Mr A] a friend through the applicants’ church and [the] applicants’ parish priest and confessor. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic (Lebanese) and English languages.

4. The applicants were represented in relation to the review.

   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.

    The applicants’ claims:

11. The applicants’ claim to fear being killed by Islamic extremists as a result of their Christian religion if they return to Egypt. The applicants also claim to have been physically harassed and intimidated by Muslim neighbours as well as having their lives threatened while running a [business] in a suburb of Cairo. They claim that the instigators of the campaign of intimidation against them were by [Occupant 1] who occupied the shop below their [business] and [Occupant 2] who lived above their [business]. They claim that despite repeatedly requesting protection by the Egyptian police, the police response was inadequate to prevent the continuation of the campaign against them. The applicants also claim to have relocated to another suburb of Cairo and despite this they experienced further harassment, intimidation and threats. They also claim to have relocated unsuccessfully to Alexandria to escape the campaign being waged against them by their former neighbours who are Muslim extremists.

    The delegate’s decision

12. The delegate found the applicants to be credible and consistent in relation to their claims. The delegate found that the applicants’ personal experiences of threats, intimidation and harassment by neighbours were credible and consistent with evidence provided during a protection visa interview as well as in their detailed written claims.

13. The delegate also accepts that the applicants are Coptic Christians.

14. The delegate did not accept that the applicants’ son was forced to constantly relocate as a result of the campaign against the applicants by Muslim extremists and noted there had been no evidence provided regarding their son’s alleged movement around Egypt. The delegate also did not accept that the applicants had seriously attempted to relocate to other regions of Egypt, but they had limited their attempts to nearby suburbs of Cairo where they were located and threatened by their tormentors. The delegate noted that the applicants acknowledged this relocation only represented a [number] minute drive from their usual residence.

15. The delegate noted an issues paper prepared by the Department Egypt: Treatment of Coptic Christians and State Protection regarding the security situation in Egypt confronting Coptic Christians and considered there was no country information that fundamentally contradicts the conclusion in that paper that there remain only spasmodic attacks on churches and individual Christians. The delegate therefore found that there is only a remote or insignificant chance that the applicants will suffer serious harm if they return to Egypt and therefore the lack of uniform and comprehensive state protection is of only secondary consideration. The delegate noted that the country information indicates that on the whole there is effective state protection for Coptic Christians and therefore there is not a real chance that the applicants will suffer serious harm as a result of their Christian religion. The delegate noted that the applicants’ fear of harm due to their personal experiences was not consistent with the report by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s (DFAT) report (2014) which clearly states that state protection may not be universally available to all Coptic Christians in all situations.

16. The delegate gave the applicants and their representative an opportunity to address the findings of the DFAT report but he did not consider that their submission contradicted the general findings. The delegate noted that the applicants’ submission referred to institutional administrative discrimination against Coptic Christians but considered that discrimination was not necessarily persecution and apart from demonstrating that there is a degree of societal hostility towards Coptic Christians in contemporary Egypt, they have failed to identify persecution on any significant scale in that country. The delegate noted that the submission included DFAT travel advice which warns Australian travellers to be cautious when travelling to Egypt but fails to acknowledge that the advice warns of frequent use of small explosives generally against security forces and that bystanders have been killed as a result of security forces being targeted. This advice does not refer to the targeting of Coptic Christians.

17. In relation to the issue of relocation the delegate accepts that there are underlying religious tensions and antagonism in modern Egypt but he did not accept that the applicants had adequately demonstrated there was a real chance they will suffer serious harm if they return to Egypt and relocate away from Cairo. The delegate states there was no evidence that the applicants will be hunted down by their neighbours if they relocated for example to Alexandria and that they had not made a credible attempt to relocate to another region of Egypt to avoid the persecution they had suffered. The delegate also did not accept that the applicants have any sort of high religious profile but rather they had bad luck in terms of their neighbours. The delegate was satisfied that the applicants can relocate to another region of Egypt to escape the persecution they had suffered at the hands of their neighbours. He not satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicants being removed from Australia to a receiving country that there is a real risk they will suffer significant harm. 

    Evidence considered

18. The Tribunal has received evidence from a range of sources (copies which were provided to the Department) in relation to the applicants’ identity, evidence about their business in Cairo. There were certified translations of various complaints that were made to the police by the applicants regarding personal attacks and property damage and investigations conducted in 2007. These documents also allude to the applicants being investigated for allegations made against them by the same people they had complained against. These documents also include references to the applicants’ son. There was a statement made to the Cairo police by the first named applicant dated [in] June 2009 in which he has claimed that his wife had been receiving nuisance calls. There was also evidence of a further police complaint in 2011 made by the applicants regarding another physical attack on the second named applicant and witness statements. There was also a court document which indicates that the applicants and their son were found not guilty and a civil counterclaim by the other parties was refused. This document also shows that the matter was appealed and [in] January 2008 the verdict was upheld. There were also photographs which the applicants’ claim show property damage of their business and home.

19. The applicants have provided certified translations of what appear to be text messages [in] April 2011 which were essentially of a threatening nature. There was also a text messages [in] June 2012 inviting the applicants to convert to Islam voluntarily to be safe and secure otherwise they will be persecuted for refusing the “religion of righteousness”. The Tribunal has also considered a message from the Committee for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice which essentially threatens the applicants for being Christians, blasphemers and infidels as well as for their business activity [towards] “Muslim girls” and urge them to convert to Islam. There was also a further translation of a telephone message dated [in] July 2015 to the applicants’ son threatening that if he did not convert to Islam his life would be at risk. The message appears in four parts over the course of the day and refers to the sender being able to communicate with him even though he had changed his telephone number and also refers to the sender having spies in state security and threatening him if he does not renounce his complaint. The message refers to the first named applicant and the impurity of his Christian religion.

20. The Tribunal has also considered various letters from the Coptic Orthodox Church in relation to the applicants’ son dating from 2013, 2014 and 2015 requesting various monasteries to allow him to stay. In one of these requests to [name] church in [Country 1] to allow him to stay due to his “bad psychological condition” and in another to the retreat house at the [location], the request is for the applicants’ son to stay as his life is at risk.

21. The Tribunal has also noted a statement by the applicants’ son made to the police at [location] [in] January 2013 which refers to an assault on him by three assailants and he refers to a dispute with the owner of a [certain] shop adjacent to his mother’s [business].

22. The Tribunal has also noted the following additional documents submitted:

    ·A certified translation of a classified advertisement dated [in] March 2012 referring to a shop for rent, a [certain] shop available with all tools and equipment with the name of the first named applicant as the contact. There was also a certified translation of an advertisement dated [in] October 2011 for [employees] with the first named applicant as the contact

    ·Letters of support from [a person from the] Salvation Army dated May and September 2015 who confirms that the second named applicant is a volunteer and receives support through that organisation.

    ·There was also a letter for support from [a person from an], [agency], who have been providing the applicants with a range of services to assist them to settle into the community.

    ·Medical documents in relation to the first named applicant

    ·Recent country information regarding attacks on Christians in Egypt which the Tribunal has considered.

23. The Tribunal has also considered the evidence contained in the Department’s file, including identity documents, statutory declarations and submissions made by the applicants’ former representatives.

    The hearing

24. The Tribunal has considered evidence provided in relation to the first named applicant who has been referred to a [specialist] at [a] Hospital for further investigations as [an examination] has shown there is [a medical condition]. The second named applicant told the Tribunal that she is suffering from [medical conditions] which she attributes to the ongoing threats and events that have occurred from when she was in Egypt.

25. The second named applicant confirmed she was born in Giza and her husband in Minya. Her husband’s family are no longer in Minya because of the turbulence affecting Christians they had to leave. She has two brothers, one lives in [location] and the other in [Country 1]. Her brother who lives in Egypt lives in a compound and at one stage a group of Muslims stoned the area and stole jewellery. Her other brother was [an officer] in the [military] but is no retired. She said it was difficult for him to achieve a high status in the [military] as a Christian but he did so, as he was a highly qualified [occupation]. [Details deleted]. His name is [name] and is [age] currently living close to [city].

26. Her husband’s siblings are living in Cairo. One has converted to Islam and the other who is a [occupation] in a [workplace] in Cairo has been subjected to many problems. The applicant said she has a daughter in Australia who has been here since 2006 and is married. Her son is in Egypt.

27. The Tribunal discussed the delegate’s findings in relation and noted that the claims regarding the harassment, assaults and ongoing disputes with their Muslim neighbours had been accepted. The Tribunal indicated that based on the evidence provided to the Department as well as directly to the Tribunal it was satisfied that the events as described had taken place and they had indeed been victimised because of their religion. The Tribunal then discussed the issue of relocation with the applicants.

28. The second named applicant confirmed that she and her husband had left their business and apartment and moved to another part of Cairo however the same people and their associates who had been harassing and persecuting them continued to do so. The Tribunal asked how she believes they were found. She said they had gone to her [family member’s] house in Giza and had told the porter that she was a [occupation] in order that he spread the word so she could get work. One day the porter knocked on her door and said there some women in niqabs waiting to [for her]. A few days later the porter knocked on her door and said there were two women who were accompanied by about ten bearded men waiting to see her. He was frightened and she told him to say she was not at home. She could not understand why these people had come to her home. The porter returned and told her that he had overheard one of the men saying that they would get her another time. She did not see these people but she thinks one of the people in the building was behind it. She believes these people were associated with the ones who had been harassing and persecuting them at their business. Once these people found them at her [family member]’s house the threats continued. On one occasion they stormed the house and pushed her [family member] to the floor. Her [family member] was elderly and she went into shock. They then moved to [location] in February 2012 which is remote and stayed there from February 2012 to June 2012 and they have provided a copy of the lease for that house to the Tribunal. They did not have problems while they were there, but the property was very basic and there was no water, electricity or gas. It was about [distance] from Cairo. They had to extend a wife to the main power lines in order to get electricity. There were about [number] other families living in that location.

29. The applicant was asked if she and her husband had relocated to Alexandria. She said they had not. She said they had moved twice to find a safe haven. They first went to her [family member]’s house and then to [location]. This place was nearly [number] hours out of Cairo. The Tribunal put to the applicant that the delegate had noted they had moved 30 minutes away. She said she did not recall being asked the distance but that Giza and Cairo are adjacent but it is still some distance away.

30. The applicant was asked if she believed there was anywhere safe for her and her family in Egypt. She said that [Occupant 1] who had started the persecution against her and her family is associated with [Occupant 2] who is the one who has access to their movements. He was living in the same building.

31. The applicant was asked if the police had investigated their complaints about [Occupant 1] and his associates. She said that the police took their statements but they treated them very poorly. She believes that [Occupant 2] in her building had spoken to them about [Occupant 1] who later bragged to them that he did not fear her and her family’s complaints. She believes they could locate her and her family wherever they went. It is a requirement to register addresses with the authorities and phone numbers. It would not be too difficult for a law enforcement officer to get access to this information.

1. The applicant was asked why these people were so interested in pursuing them. She told the Tribunal that they wanted them to convert to Islam and to annoy them.

2. At this point the applicant requested to speak to the Tribunal alone and everyone who accompanied the applicant left the room.

3. The applicant told the Tribunal that she wanted to say something she has never told anyone apart from her [family member]. In around August 2011 she and her family had gone to stay with her [family member] in Giza. In around November 2011 she needed some things from her old shop, such as [certain items] and equipment but her husband would not allow her to return. She went to the old shop at 8.00 am in the morning before [Occupant 1] downstairs opened his shop at 9.00 am. She intended to be very quick and get what she needed and then to leave. As she was leaving the old shop, her view was partially obscured by the security door and [number] men had come up and pushed her inside and closed the door. One of these men was [Occupant 1]. He held a knife and another had a glass of liquid. She realised that something horrible was going to happen. [Details deleted]. She started to shout and scream but no-one appeared to hear her or came to help. He told her to stop or else he would hurt her. He also told her that the liquid in the glass was acid which he was going to throw in her face. [Details deleted]. She was told that she was not to tell anyone about this as they had the photos and they would expose her. She was told they could get her at any time. She returned to her [family member]’s house and never went back. She does not want her husband or her daughter to know about this attack and her husband does not understand that things are worse than he thinks. The applicant explained that the background to all of the events is that years ago, [Occupant 1] had made passes at her and he wanted her to convert so that she would divorce her husband and be with him. He would tell her that her husband was too old for her and he was better. When she refused to listen to him, he started harassing her and her family which escalated to violence.

4. The applicant said that she believes this man and his associated can get to her son. Her son has changed his telephone number nearly 12 times and they have continually been able to find him and threaten him. She said that her son had been assaulted by [Occupant 1] and his associates in 2013. This was done to frighten her and to show her that they have the power to do so.

5. The applicant said that her son is a [occupation] but has been unable to live in peace as he has been targeted. He was assaulted in 2013 by these same people and [was injured]. Her son required [surgery]. He was attacked as he was leaving work. The people who assaulted her son told him this was a message to her. When her son asked her why these people keep on harassing and attacking them she told him that they wanted the shop. She had not told him anything further. She believes the attack on her son was an ongoing campaign against her to force her to convert. She said these people are obsessed with trying to force her to convert and are convinced that Islam is the only way to paradise.

6. The applicant said her son did not apply for a visa to come to Australia when they did as he was still working. He has been sent threatening text messages and phone calls threatening him if he does not convert to Islam. These types of threat have escalated and as things have destabilised in Egypt since they left, her son has had to move around as he does not feel safe. He has stayed with his [relative] and with friends and then moved to Alexandria. He was then assaulted and received more threatening messages and he has been offered sanctuary in various monasteries and religious retreats through the church as his life is in danger. She said that there is a system in Egypt where if a Christian person is threatened with violence because of their religion they can go to monasteries for refuge but they must be referred by a priest. The applicant said that although her son has made complaints to the police, they have done nothing except to say it is one person’s word against the other. After her son was injured and had to have surgery, the police forced him to participate in a reconciliation session and accepted false statements the assailants made during this that they agree not to pursue him, however the attempts against her son have not ceased and he is still in hiding. The last threat he received was by telephone in 2015.

   Witness evidence

7. The Tribunal spoke to [Mr A]. He confirmed that he is an Australian citizen and he has known the applicants through their church having met four years ago. The witness provided details of his employment and address. He is [one] of the team [at] [name] Church and had done similar work when he was living in Egypt. He has also been assisting the applicants with accessing community services and to settle in.

8. He told the Tribunal that he was last in Egypt in 2013 and travelled to Cairo, Alexandria and Upper Egypt. He said the Muslim Brotherhood was still around and that Christians were still being targeted. He said that Christians are easily recognised as it is not easy to hide a cross. He told the Tribunal that he is familiar with the applicants’ situation as, coincidentally, one of his [relatives] lived in the area where they had their [business]. When he was in Egypt his [relative] had told him about the problems some Christians were experiencing in the neighbourhood and many people were aware that they were being targeted. His [relative] had not met the applicants when they were living in Cairo but it was common knowledge what was going on. After he got to know the applicants, he eventually connected them as the people he had heard about from his [relative]. He volunteered to come along today to confirm their circumstances as he had heard about them, not only from the applicants but independently from a [relative] in Egypt. He is also aware that the applicants’ son is still in hiding and he is not unique in this as it is known in the church community that others have also requested help from the church for shelter. He said that the problems the applicants and their son have encountered are not necessarily with members of the Muslim Brotherhood but with particular Muslim people who have decided to target them.

9. [Mr A] told the Tribunal that the security situation in Egypt has deteriorated in the last few years. While the current president of Egypt has been supportive of Christians there has been continuing targeting and violence. There have been over 67 churches burned and new churches when and if they are eventually built will be unable to display a cross. Christians in Egypt are very upset about this.

10. [Mr A] told the Tribunal that [a bishop] in [Australia] has very good communication with churches in Egypt and they often raise money to help members of the church.

11. Father [name] confirmed he is the parish priest at [name] Church and has been assisting the applicants. He said he has known the applicants for around one and a half years and has become very familiar with their circumstances. He said he is also familiar with the situation regarding Christians in Egypt and said they are still being targeted. He said churches are also being actively targeted. He has spoken to many people who have had to leave Egypt because it is not safe for Christians. He believes that the applicants have been genuinely targeted because of their religion.

12. The Tribunal referred to country information in a report prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) in which they advise the following:

    5.3 Despite occasional incidents, a more substantial police presence in urban areas has enabled Copts to live there in greater security. The level of police presence in rural and poorer areas is generally less than in the cities, and as a consequence Copts are less safe in these areas.

    5.4 DFAT assesses that on a day-to-day basis in urban areas, the state has a capacity and willingness to provide protection to Copts, and generally does so. Copts facing harassment are able to go to a local police station for protection in these areas. DFAT assesses that, under the Sisi Government, the security services see it as being in their interest to be responsive to Coptic grievances. However, societal discrimination may impact on the level of protection offered to Copts by individual security officials.

    5.5 Response times and rates by security forces in relation to incidents of communal violence are not uniform and can be slow. However, this is an issue that impacts the wider community as well. Reported slow responses to complaints are at least in part due to the local police force being ill-equipped and under-resourced, particularly in rural areas.[1]

    [1] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade DFAT Thematic Report – Egyptian Copts, 24 November 2015

13. The applicants were asked for their comments about this information.

14. The second named applicant told the Tribunal that the information is unrealistic as Christians are still being targeted. Christians are forced into reconciliation sessions with Muslims who target them and these do not resolve issues. There was an incident where some Muslim extremists targeted a woman and forced her to walk naked in public and the police in that case tried to address this with a reconciliation session. There were four Christian children who had to flee to Switzerland aged 9, 8, 14 and 12 for apparently insulting Islam and they were convicted in their absence and sentenced to five years imprisonment. They went to the Swiss Embassy for help and were taken out of the country. At a recent wedding, masked Muslim extremists barged in and started shooting at a Christian wedding. They shot the bride and groom as well as her parents. The survivors there were also told to try and reconcile with the attackers. Nothing has happened to bring these men to justice. The problem is not the government or authorities, but the Muslim population who are extremists. They have not changed. There is still a great deal of support for the Muslim Brotherhood but it is now underground. When people like that target Christians, the government cannot protect them. Her son has been in hiding for years now and if these people find him they will harm him. In their case it appears that the problem has become personal and the authorities have been unable to help. In addition religious hate speech has not changed and extremists incite people to hate Christians and to harm them. Investigations of incidents where Christians are targeted have led to nothing even under the present government. There are those extremists who are also targeting police for trying to do their job. Police officers are being killed every day. Last week a major was assassinated because he had confronted some members of the Muslim Brotherhood. These people do not have any fear.

    Discussion of the evidence and findings

    Country of reference

15. The applicants have provided the Department with identity documents including certified copies of their Egyptian passports, birth certificates, marriage contract and an extract of their family registration issued by the Ministry of Interior in Egypt. 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.

16. 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).

    Claim of continuing persecution because of the applicants’ religion

17. The Tribunal is satisfied on the basis of the evidence provided both in writing and at the hearing, that the applicants are Coptic Orthodox Christians and have been so since birth. The Tribunal also accepts that the applicants continue to practise their faith in Australia and this has been attested to by [their] parish priest. 

18. In relation to the events outlined in their claims, like the delegate, the Tribunal found the applicants’ evidence to be consistent and credible in relation to their personal experiences of threats, attacks, intimidation and harassment by extremist Muslim neighbours which spanned a number of years and caused them to fear being harmed. The Tribunal also accepts that they complained to the authorities on a number of occasions and has read the certified translation of statements made by them and by their son. The Tribunal accepts that the reason for the applicants being targeted is because of their religion. There was additional evidence provided to the Tribunal during the hearing by the second named applicant about the original motivation to target her which involved her neighbour’s personal interest in her and to persuade her to convert in order to pursue a relationship with her. The Tribunal accepts her evidence but also considers that the attempt to force her to convert to Islam for whatever reason still relates to her being targeted for reason of her religion.

19. The delegate did not accept that the applicants’ son has had to constantly relocate and in order to address this concern; they have provided certified translations of requests made by various members of the clergy in Egypt to offer him refuge and sanctuary over a number of years. These refer to his being at risk and being vulnerable. On balance and in view of the overall security situation in Egypt for Christians, the Tribunal is prepared to accept that the applicants’ son has been targeted for reasons of his religion. The Tribunal is mindful that the applicants’ son remains in Egypt and this claim in itself does not necessarily further their claims for protection in Australia, but forms part of the overall picture of the applicants’ history regarding their experiences in Egypt prior to coming to Australia which the Tribunal accepts.

20. The Tribunal must consider whether the applicants’ 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’[2]:

    [2] 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.

21. 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’[3], 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’[4].

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

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

22. 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.

23. 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,[5] 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 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 down in 2013. However, according to recent country information reported by the DFAT although the situation has remained generally calm for some time, recent events in Egypt indicate that there has once again been violence towards Christians.

    [5] 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

24. On balance the Tribunal accepts earlier country information 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 its 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 (see attachment).

25. 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[6] 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’,[7] and provides for fines or imprisonment, for perpetrators of acts of discrimination; this amendment however does not include any enforcement mechanisms.[8] 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.[9] In 2014 DFAT has also reported that while ‘anti‑discrimination laws exist, these can be difficult to implement’.[10]

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

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

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

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

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

1. 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.[11]

   [11] 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

2. 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,[12] 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’.[13] 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.[14]

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

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

   [14] 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

3. 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.[15] 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’.[16] 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.’[17] In its June 2014 policy document on Copts, the UK Border Agency similarly assessed that Christians face ‘personal and collective societal discrimination.’[18] 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.’[19]

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

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

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

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

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

4. 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.

5. Based on the country information, the Tribunal accepts that as Christians the applicants have been targeted with threats, harassment, attacks and violence and their complaints to the police have not been adequately addressed over a prolonged period because they have been discriminated against because of their religion in that the authorities have failed to act to prevent them being further targeted by Muslim extremists The Tribunal accepts that discrimination of Christians in Egypt is religiously motivated and is aimed at all religious minorities. The country information indicates that the applicants’ experiences in relation to having difficulties seeking protection and redress from the authorities and failing to have that afforded to them because they are Christian is not unique.

6. The Tribunal notes that the Egyptian National Police are responsible for law enforcement nationwide and various sources including DFAT[20] 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.[21]

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

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

7. 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 (see attachment). The Tribunal has noted recent developments regarding an increase in sectarian violence and the targeting of Christians and accepts that the applicants have been targeted because they were identified as Christians.

8. 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 their 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,[22] 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.[23] The Tribunal is satisfied this has occurred in the present case. 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. In this instance the state has repeatedly failed to protect the applicants, and the Tribunal is not satisfied that the state is able to protect them.

9. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that it would not be reasonable for the applicants to relocate as discrimination and attacks against Christians is pervasive across Egypt and there is a high likelihood. 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.

10. While official and societal discrimination by itself is not indicative of serious harm, the Tribunal considers that the circumstances in this case, including a history of persecution experienced by the applicants for reasons of their religion and 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 return 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 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 somewhat contained sectarian violence, these recent events, indicate to the Tribunal that this violence still occurs and there has been no appreciable change in the treatment of Christians.

11. Therefore the Tribunal finds that the treatment the applicants face on their return to Egypt amounts to serious harm on cumulative grounds and they satisfy 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, threats and physical attacks. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicants have a well-founded fear of being persecuted by non-state actors and will not be adequately protected 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 their liberty, significant physical harassment and significant ill-treatment for a Convention reason.

12. 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. Therefore the applicants satisfy the criterion set out in s.36(2)(a).

    DECISION

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

    [23] 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

13. 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.[24] Elections held in May 2014 saw former defence Minister Abdul Fatah al-Sisi elected President.

    [24] 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.[25]

    [25] 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[26] 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.

    [26] 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…[27]

    [27] 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.’[28]

    [28] 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.’ …

    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.’[29]

    [29] 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 situation 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…[30]

    [30] ‘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…

    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.[31]

    [31] ‘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 reported:

    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.”[32]

    [32] ‘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."[33]

    [33] ‘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.[34]

    [34] ‘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[35] 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.

    [35] 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…[36]

    State Protection

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

    20.  According to the UK Home Office Policy and Information Note Egypt: Christians[37] the following is noted regarding state protection:

    [37] 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’.[38] …

    [38] 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).’[39]

    [39] 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