NAKP v MIMIA

[2004] HCATrans 515

[2004] HCATrans 515

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S601 of 2003

B e t w e e n -

NAKP

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

KIRBY J
CALLINAN J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON TUESDAY, 30 NOVEMBER 2004, AT 2.56 PM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

NAKP appeared in person.

MR S.B. LLOYD:  If the Court pleases, I appear for the respondent.  (instructed by Sparke Helmore)

KIRBY J:   You are the interpreter.  Right, you are an interpreter from the Bengali language into the English language and the English language into the Bengali language.  Swear the interpreter, please.

MOHAMMED SHAH ISLAM, affirmed as interpreter:

KIRBY J:   Could you explain to the applicant that when we call him NAKP we are not meaning any disrespect to him, we are simply conforming to the Act of the Federal Parliament which is designed for his protection so that his name will not appear on the transcript.  Now, the applicant understands that he has 20 minutes in which to address the Court.  We have read the documents and he does not have to repeat those but now is the chance for him to say what he wishes to say.

NAKP:   Yes, your Honour, I have something to say.

KIRBY J:   Very well.  You stand up and come to the centre and then with the assistance of the interpreter you say whatever you want to say.

NAKP (through interpreter):   Your Honour, the interview took place in my case round about…..but within that five and a half……he misled me in different ways.  He did ask me a lot of political question.  To consider my case Migration Act was not properly observed.  Also my previous migration is indeed some mistake.  I did not get the benefit of doubt and any benefit from those ‑ ‑ ‑

KIRBY J:   I am not understanding.  Would you repeat what you have just said?

NAKP (through interpreter):   My previous migration agent did some mistake about me but I did not get any benefit off that in spite of telling him the fact.

KIRBY J:   That may be so but we have to deal with the matter on the basis of the record which we have before us.  We are not a court that can fix all problems up.  We are a Court of law that deals with errors on the part of the courts before the matter comes to us.

NAKP (through interpreter):   Yes, and I will not have anything to say in that ‑ ‑ ‑

KIRBY J:   Very well.  You may just sit down for a moment.  Mr Lloyd, do you have anything to add to the written submissions of the respondent?

MR LLOYD:   No, I do not, your Honour.

KIRBY J:   The applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, seeks leave to appeal against a decision of the Federal Court of Australia affirming the refusal of the Refugee Review Tribunal to grant him a protection visa.

The applicant’s claims of persecution, because of his membership of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, were rejected by the Refugee Review Tribunal on several bases.  As to some of them, the Tribunal found that they were fabricated.  As to others, it was violent criminal rather than political activities on the applicant’s part that attracted the attention of the authorities in Bangladesh, according to the decision of the Tribunal.

The applicant then took the matter to the Federal Court.  The Federal Court took the view that the Tribunal had made no errors either of law or otherwise so as to justify any intervention by the Federal Court.

This Court has examined the record, including the reasons of the Federal Court.  We are of the opinion that there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the reasoning and decisions of the Federal Court of Australia.  The application is therefore dismissed with costs.

The reasons that I have just given will be taken out and will be sent to the applicant within the next few days.

AT 3.03 PM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED