NAFP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2003] FCA 241

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAFP v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 241

NAFP v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

N 1330 of 2002

BRANSON J
13 MARCH 2003
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1330 of 2002

BETWEEN:	NAFP APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	BRANSON J
DATE OF ORDER:	13 MARCH 2003
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.the application be dismissed;

2.the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the application.   

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 1330 of 2002

BETWEEN:	NAFP APPLICANT
AND:	MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	BRANSON J
DATE:	13 MARCH 2003
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant arrived in Australia on 13 April 2000 having travelled on an Indian passport.  He lodged an application for a protection visa on 16 May 2000 claiming to be a citizen of Bangladesh.  A delegate of the respondent refused this application on 23 May 2000.  The applicant applied for review of this decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) on 2 June 2000.  On 14 November 2002 the Tribunal handed down its decision affirming the decision not to grant the protection visa. 

2. The applicant gave evidence before the Tribunal on 19 July 2002.  He claimed to fear persecution in Bangladesh by fundamentalist Muslims including fundamentalist members of his own family.  He claimed that they would persecute him on two grounds.  The first is that he is homosexual and the second that he is involved with western music.  The applicant alleges that he was expelled from his family home in 1996 after being discovered having sexual relations with a male servant.  He said that he moved to Dhaka in 1998 and worked in a recording studio for two years.  There he became involved in a sexual relationship with another homosexual man.  He said that people discovered this relationship and he was threatened by his room mates and work mates and eventually lost his job as a result of his homosexuality.  He was forced to move from where he was living and moved in with his homosexual partner with whom he lived for two and a half months. 

3. The applicant claimed that his family holds fundamentalist Islamic beliefs and hate him because of his homosexuality and love of western music.  He said that they have placed significant pressure on him to marry and that his mother has threatened to commit suicide if he does not get married.  He said that if he returns to Bangladesh he will be forced to follow Islamic religious customs and to get married. 

4. The Tribunal apparently accepted that the applicant is a citizen of Bangladesh.  It was prepared to accept that the applicant is homosexual.  However, it did not accept many of the applicant’s other claims.  The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a reliable witness and said that…