SZGQN v MIAC & Anor

[2008] HCATrans 35

[2008] HCATrans 035

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S189 of 2007

B e t w e e n -

SZGQN

Applicant

and

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

Publication of reasons and pronouncement of orders

KIRBY J
HEYDON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 7 FEBRUARY 2008, AT 9.02 AM 

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

KIRBY J:   The applicant is a national of Bangladesh.  He arrived in Australia in July 2004 and promptly applied for a protection visa.  A delegate of the Minister refused his application.  He sought review by the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal").  He claimed to be a "refugee" within the Refugees Convention and Protocol, given effect by the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act").

The basis of the application was the applicant's claim that he had been a worker for the Awami League, a political party in Bangladesh.  He claimed to have been targeted by members of the BNP, a competing party, and to fear imprisonment on false charges.  He produced certain letters in support of his claims.  The Tribunal did not accept that what was said in the letters was true.  It was not satisfied that the applicant was a high profile political figure, as claimed.  It pointed to various inconsistencies that made the claim of persecution unconvincing.

From the rejection by the Tribunal, the applicant sought judicial review in the Federal Magistrates Court (Emmett FM). His claim included an allegation of a denial of procedural fairness. That claim was dismissed by Emmett FM who also rejected an argument that the Tribunal was in breach of the requirements of s 424A of the Act.

From this decision, the applicant appealed to the Federal Court of Australia where the appellate jurisdiction was exercised by Collier J.  Her Honour rejected the applicant's arguments and found that the Federal Magistrate's decision had been correct on the material before her.

From the dismissal of the appeal, the applicant seeks special leave to appeal to this Court. A complaint is made concerning the Federal Court's analysis of the reasons of the Tribunal and also its failure to perceive jurisdictional error in a suggested failure to exercise the power given by s 427(1)(d) of the Act. We are unconvinced that such grounds have any prospects of success in this Court. Cf Minister for Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v SGLB (2004) 78 ALJR 992; 207 ALR 12; SZBYR v Minister (2007) 81 ALJR 1190; 235 ALR 609. The application for special leave is therefore refused.

Because the applicant is unrepresented and has filed a written case, his application has been dealt with in accordance with rule 41.10 of the High Court Rules.  Pursuant to rule 41.10.5, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.  I publish that disposition signed by Heydon J and myself.

AT 9.05 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED