FTQ18 v Minister for Home Affairs

The applicant, FTQ18, sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who claimed to be a national of Vietnam, alleged that they had been subjected to persecution in their home country and therefore met the criteria for a protection visa under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Minister's decision was based on adverse security assessments concerning the applicant.

The central legal issue before Egan J was whether the Minister's decision to refuse the protection visa, based on adverse security assessments, was lawful. Specifically, the court was required to consider whether the Minister had properly exercised their discretion under the *Migration Act* and whether the process followed in reaching the decision was procedurally fair, particularly in light of the applicant's inability to access or challenge the adverse security assessments.

Egan J found that the Minister's decision was vitiated by a failure to afford the applicant procedural fairness. His Honour held that while the Minister was entitled to rely on adverse security assessments, the applicant must be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the substance of those assessments, even if the assessments themselves could not be disclosed. The court determined that the process followed, which did not allow the applicant to meaningfully engage with the reasons for the adverse findings, fell short of the requirements of procedural fairness.

Consequently, Egan J quashed the Minister's decision and remitted the matter to the Minister for reconsideration according to law.