Maisuradze v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

[2000] FCA 1947

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Maisuradze & Anor v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[2000] FCA 1947

MERAB MAISURADZE & MAYA GOGSADZE v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
N 1049 OF 2000

JUDGE:         WHITLAM J
DATE:           6 DECEMBER 2000
PLACE:         SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N1049 OF 2000

BETWEEN:	MERAB MAISURADZE AND MAYA GOGSADZE APPLICANTS
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	WHITLAM J
DATE OF ORDER:	6 December 2000
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application is dismissed.

2.The applicants are to pay the respondent’s costs.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N1049 OF 2000

BETWEEN:	MERAB MAISURADZE AND MAYA GOGSADZE APPLICANTS
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	WHITLAM J
DATE:	6 December 2000
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), made on 25 August 2000.  The Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the respondent refusing to grant a protection visa to the applicants.  The application as filed relies on the grounds of review contained in paras (a), (e) and (g) of the Migration Act 1958 (“the Act”). None of the grounds is particularised.

2. The applicants are citizens of Georgia who arrived in Australia on 1 July 1998.  On 29 March 1999 they lodged an application for protection visas.  On 29 April 1999 a delegate of the respondent refused to grant the visas and on 26 May 1999 the applicants applied to the Tribunal for a review of that decision.  The applicants attended a hearing at the Tribunal on 14 June to give evidence.  On 13 September the Tribunal handed down its decision affirming the decision of the delegate.

3. The claims of the applicants are set out in a letter dated 29 March 1999 from their adviser.  It was claimed that Mr Maisuradze (to whom the Tribunal referred as the main applicant) was a well-known television presenter in Georgia, who was shot in the head when armed supporters of the former President of Georgia, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, broke into the television station and fighting broke out.  Mr Maisuradze survived but “partly lost his memory and ability to speak” as a result of his injuries.  He became disgruntled with the incumbent President, Eduard Shevardnadze, as a result of his government’s attitude towards those who had risked their lives defending the State, and he started to criticise the government.  Mr Maisuradze was later sacked and his apartment was searched by the national security service.  The two applicants then fled to Armenia in October 1996.  Whilst there the main applicant wrote a number of articles about the situation in Georgia in 1994, some of which were published in Georgia under an assumed name.  Returning to Georgia in the beginning of 1998, he was summoned to a police station and, although not mistreated, he claimed that he was being watched.  He moved to a house of his friends in Tblisi although his de facto spouse, the other applicant, remained at home.  The police conducted a further search of the applicants’ home and claimed to find a small quantity of narcotics. The main applicant claimed that he feared that a false criminal charge would be brought against him on account of his political activity.

4. The Tribunal did not accept the applicant's claims.  It made the following findings material to its decision:

   (1)The applicants were not wanted by the authorities in Georgia at the time they departed Georgia in 1998.  The applicants believed that they were not so wanted. (at 14.)

   (2)The applicants had done nothing prior to June 1998 “such as would bring upon themselves the risk of arrest or of other forms of repression at the hands of the Shevardnadze government or its agents”. (at 15.)

   (3)In the recent past, present or foreseeable future there was “nothing to satisfy [the Tribunal] that the applicants face a real chance of Convention-related persecution in Georgia”. (at 18.)

5. The Tribunal also considered the claims as to Mr Maisuradze’s expressions of political opinion, the incident in which the applicant was shot in the face, and Mr Maisuradze’s dismissal from the television station. After considering those matters the Tribunal concluded that they did not shake its confidence as to the state of affairs at the time of the applicants’ departure from Georgia.

6. Further, and most importantly, the Tribunal found that the applicants did not have any subjective fear of persecution.  These findings were, in my opinion, open to the Tribunal on the material before it.  Necessarily, they led to the decision made by the Tribunal.  Accordingly no reviewable error of law has been made out.  What little has been said today by Ms Gogsadze serves only to show that it is the merits of the decision that the applicants wish to agitate.

7. No ground of review has been made out.  The application will be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Whitlam.

Associate:

Dated:             6 December 2000

Ms Gogsadze appeared in person.

Counsel for the Respondent:	Justin Smith
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Sparke Helmore
Date of Hearing:	6 December 2000
Date of Judgment:	6 December 2000