BOO19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

This matter concerned an application by a Rwandan citizen, the applicant, for judicial review of a decision made by the second respondent, which had affirmed the first respondent's refusal to grant the applicant a Safe Haven Enterprise visa. The applicant had entered Australia on a Temporary Activity visa to cover the 2018 Commonwealth Games, but disclosed an intention to seek protection after his visa expired. His initial visa was cancelled, and his subsequent application for a protection visa was refused. The applicant claimed he feared persecution in Rwanda due to his journalism, which often reported on corruption, and his imputed membership of an opposition political party.

The applicant sought to establish jurisdictional error on the part of the second respondent. Specifically, the applicant contended that the second respondent had apprehended bias, arguing that the delegate who made the initial decision had been funded to consider evidence, which the applicant alleged indicated a predetermined outcome. The applicant's case was that this funding arrangement tainted the decision-making process, rendering it jurisdictionally flawed.

Judge Jarrett found that the applicant's submissions did not establish any jurisdictional error by the second respondent. The court reasoned that the funding arrangement for considering evidence did not, in itself, demonstrate apprehended bias or a lack of impartiality. The court concluded that the grounds pursued by the applicant in his amended application failed to reveal any jurisdictional error.

Consequently, the amended application was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs in the sum of $7,467.00. The court also ordered that the name of the first respondent be amended to Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services, and Multicultural Affairs.