SZEGE v MIMIA

[2005] HCATrans 911

[2005] HCATrans 911

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S304 of 2005

B e t w e e n -

SZEGE

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW J
KIRBY J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 9 NOVEMBER 2005, AT 9.51 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

GUMMOW J:   The applicant is a citizen of India.  He claims to have converted to Christianity in 1999 and to be entitled to refugee status by reason of a well-founded fear of political persecution.

The Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa.  The Tribunal considered that the applicant’s claims about his political involvement in India were vague and his evidence did not go “beyond the most banal generalities”.  In the Tribunal’s view, this demonstrated that the applicant had been only “a low-level activist with an insignificant and uninfluential political profile”.  The Tribunal considered that the evidence the applicant gave of violence and threats of violence directed to himself and his family did not amount to serious harm or demonstrate a real chance of serious harm should the applicant return to India.  In addition, since the applicant’s political activities were “highly localised”, he would have been able to move elsewhere in India and escape any threat of harm arising from those activities.  The Tribunal was therefore unable to be satisfied on the material before it that the applicant had a well‑founded fear of persecution should he return to India.

The applicant sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision in the Federal Magistrates Court.  That Court dismissed the application as demonstrating no basis for judicial review.  An appeal to the Federal Court (Emmett J) was dismissed.

We have considered the decisions of the Tribunal, the Federal Magistrates Court and the Federal Court.  There would be insufficient prospects of success in any appeal to this Court from the Federal Court to warrant a grant of special leave.  Accordingly, special leave is refused.

Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application for special leave.  I publish the disposition signed by Kirby J and myself.

AT 9.53 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED