EXL19 v Minister For Immigration and Anor (No.2)

This matter concerned an application for judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) regarding the applicant's Safe Haven Enterprise (subclass 790) visa application. The applicant, EXL19, sought to challenge the IAA's assessment of his claims for protection as an apostate under Iranian law and his asserted genuine adherence to Christianity.

The core legal issues before the court were whether the IAA had constructively failed to review the applicant's claims by not adequately considering the real risk of harm he faced as an apostate. Further, the court was asked to determine if there was an insufficient logical or evidentiary basis for the IAA's findings that the applicant was not a "genuine" Christian, despite his baptism and church attendance, and whether the IAA erred in concluding he was ignorant of the tenets of his faith. The court also considered whether the IAA misapplied provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning the purpose of the applicant's political and social media activities in Australia, and whether the IAA wrongly suggested the applicant should modify his behaviour to avoid persecution. Finally, the court examined whether the IAA failed to distinguish between claims relating to non-practising Muslims and apostates under the refugee criterion and the complementary protection criterion.

Justice Humphreys found that no jurisdictional error had been made out. The court reasoned that the IAA had adequately considered the applicant's claims regarding his religious beliefs and the risks associated with apostasy in Iran. The IAA's findings regarding the applicant's understanding of Christian tenets were found to have a sufficient logical and evidentiary basis, and the court did not find that the IAA had misapplied the relevant sections of the *Migration Act 1958* in relation to the applicant's activities or the assessment of his claims.

Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed.