MZYVX v Minister for Immigration

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MZYVX v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2012] FMCA 656

MIGRATION – Independent Protection Assessment Reviewer – whether reviewer erred in considering the risk faced by the applicant in the process of interrogation if he were to return to Iran.

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZQPA  [2012] FCA 1025
SZQPA v Minister for Immigration and Anor [2012] FMCA 123

Applicant: MZYVX

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: INDEPENDENT PROTECTION ASSESSMENT REVIEWER

File number: MLG 232 of 2012

Judgment of: Riley FM

Hearing date: 23 July 2012

Date of last submission: 23 July 2012

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 10 October 2012

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Gregory J Barns

Solicitors for the Applicant: Ogilvie & Co Lawyers

Counsel for the First Respondent: Catherine Symons

Solicitors for the First Respondent: Clayton Utz

Counsel for the Second Respondent: No appearance

Solicitors for the Second  Respondent: Clayton Utz

ORDERS

1. The application filed on 5 March 2012 and amended on 5 July 2012 and further amended on 12 July 2012 be dismissed.

2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs, fixed in the sum of $6,471.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLG 232 of 2012

MZYVX

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

INDEPENDENT PROTECTION ASSESSMENT REVIEWER

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. This is an application for review of a recommendation made by an Independent Protection Assessment Reviewer. 

The applicant’s claims

1. Initially, the applicant claimed that:

   a)he is an Iranian of Arabic background;

   b)he had voted for Mr Mousavi in the presidential elections;

   c)he attended a demonstration following the elections;

   d)he was imprisoned by the special forces for ten days and tortured;

   e)he was regularly interrogated by the Basij;

   f)six months after his imprisonment, he was arrested and detained for six hours;

   g)he was released after leaving his house title;

   h)he moved around frequently to avoid being arrested; and

   i)he feared persecution on the grounds of his race, being Arab, membership of a particular social group, being failed asylum seekers, and political opinion, being opposition to the government.

2. During his interview with the reviewer, the applicant claimed for the first time that he had been a member of an activist group whose leader had been tortured and killed.  He said the group had about 15 members and they would meet about 10 times per month.

The reviewer’s reasons

1. The reviewer accepted that the applicant was an Iranian national of Arabic ethnicity.  The reviewer accepted that the applicant faced discrimination and mistreatment, falling short of persecution, by reason of his Arabic ethnicity.

2. In relation to the claim about political opinion, the reviewer considered that there were numerous inconsistencies in the applicant’s claims, his claims were sketchy and unconvincing and his claim to be a member of an activist group was made late in the process.  Consequently, the reviewer was not satisfied that the applicant had participated in demonstrations, had been a member of an activist group or had been arrested or tortured.…