Ajok v Minister for Immigration

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AJOK v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION [2010] FMCA 331

MIGRATION – ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Complaints about lost immigration documents – review of freedom of information decisions – no arguable basis for judicial review found – no other general federal law jurisdictions properly invoked – application dismissed.

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), ss.10(2), 10(2)(b)(ii), 13
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth), ss.54, 55
Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), ss.55A, 98

Ajok v Mares [2010] NSWDC 62
McGowan v Migration Agents Registration Authority (2003) 129 FCR 118

Applicant: ELIZABETH AJOK

Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

File Number: SYG 275 of 2010

Judgment of: Smith FM

Hearing date: 5 May 2010

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 5 May 2010

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Applicant in person (by telephone)

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms D Watson

Solicitors for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

1. The application is dismissed. 

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYG 275 of 2010

ELIZABETH AJOK

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(revised from transcript)

1. This application was filed on 12 February 2010.  In it Ms Ajok seeks relief in relation to actions of the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship and officers of his Department.  Although Ms Ajok has concerns about the actions of other people, she has not made them respondents to the present court case. 

2. Her central concerns relate to the documents which facilitated her travel to Australia in 2002.  She was, in July 2002, given approval to travel and enter Australia with her four children on a humanitarian visa issued in response to an application made while she was in the Kakuma Refugee Camp in Africa.  Her application was processed by the Australian High Commission in Nairobi.  Following a favourable visa decision, the High Commission issued a single document entitled “Document for travel to Australia”, which covered Ms Ajok and her four children.  They were identified on the document with their personal details and photographs.  It was stamped at its bottom with the visa allowing entry to Australia of all five people.  The document stated: “this document is good for single travel to Australia only”. 

3. Ms Ajok was also given a single‑page document issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.  This also attached the personal details and photographs of Ms Ajok and her four children.  It certified that they were registered as refugees.  It referred to their travel for resettlement to Australia, and requested that assistance be given “in accordance with travel authorisation issued by the District Officer Kakuma”.  That document also stated on its face that it had limited validity from 27 August to 7 September 2002. 

4. Copies of these two travel documents are currently found on a file in the possession of the Department of Immigration, but searches for the originals have not revealed their presence in any of the records of the Department.  The file shows that Ms Ajok and her four children did travel to…