NAPF v Minister for Immigration

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAPF v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION [2004] FMCA 399

MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – whether Tribunal properly applied ‘real chance’ test – whether Tribunal failed to consider applicant’s claim.

Chan Yee Kin v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs (1989) 169 CLR 379
Randahawa v Minister for Immigration & Local Government & Ethnic Affairs (1994) 52 FCR 437
Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259
SBBS v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 361
Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs v JiaLe Geng (2001) 205 CLR 507
Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs v Thiyagarajah (2000) 199 CLR 343

Applicant: NAPF

Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

File No: SZ1247 of 2003

Delivered on: 19 March 2004

Delivered at: Sydney

Hearing date: 19 March 2004

Judgment of: Barnes FM

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Nil

Solicitors for the Applicant: Nil

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr T Reilly

Solicitors for the Respondent: Blake Dawson Waldron

ORDERS

1. That the application is dismissed. 

2. That the Applicant pay the Respondent’s costs set in the amount of $4,000. 

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SZ1247 of 2003

NAPF

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Revised from transcript)

1. This is an application for review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) which the Tribunal handed down on 11 April 2003 affirming a decision of a delegate of the respondent to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. 

2. The applicant applied for the visa on 2 August 2001.  On 10 October 2001 the delegate wrote to the applicant providing information which was adverse to his claims for comment.  The applicant did not respond.  The delegate's decision refusing the visa was made on 23 November 2001.  The applicant applied to the Tribunal for review on 28 November 2001.  His migration agent provided a written submission to the Tribunal on 4 March 2003.  The Tribunal invited the applicant to a hearing which he attended on 19 March 2003.

3. The applicant claimed to fear persecution by reason of his political opinion or membership of a particular social group in Bangladesh arising from a claim to have been involved in the founding and activities of the Sirajdikhan Humanitarian Organisation.  This was described by the applicant as a secular humanitarian organisation founded in January 1990 which comprised nine friends who were committed to social activities and wanted to improve the situation in their village.  He claimed that their goal was to encourage women to cast votes properly, and to stop child marriages and polygamy. 

4. The organisation was not formally established or registered.  The applicant claimed that the local Muslim Fundamentalists opposed the organisation and that he was threatened and attacked as a result.  He claimed that one of the group retaliated and was killed by the Fundamentalists.…