Karsten v Minister for Immigration and Anor (No.3)

Karsten (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (the respondent) to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant, who had arrived in Australia by boat, claimed to fear persecution in his country of origin due to his alleged involvement with a political organisation. The matter came before Judge Manousaridis in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant had established a real chance of suffering persecution for a Convention reason, specifically political opinion, should he be returned to his country of origin. This required the Court to assess the applicant's claims regarding his alleged affiliation with a political organisation and the potential consequences of such affiliation, as well as the general country information relevant to his situation.

Judge Manousaridis considered the applicant's evidence, including his statements about his alleged political activities and the threats he claimed to have received. The Court also had regard to the country information provided by the respondent concerning the political climate and the treatment of individuals associated with certain political groups in the applicant's country of origin. The Court applied the principles established in cases such as *Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh* and *Applicant S20/2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs*, which require an assessment of whether there is a real chance of persecution, taking into account all relevant evidence and country information. The Court found that the applicant had not discharged the onus of proving that he had a real chance of suffering persecution for a Convention reason.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.