SZJIH v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

[2008] HCASL 235

SZJIH
v
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR
[2008] HCASL 235
S609/2007

1. The applicant is a citizen of the People's Republic of China.  On 26 February 2005 a delegate of the first respondent refused his application for a protection visa.  On 23 June 2005 the Refugee Review Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision.  On 3 May 2006 the Federal Magistrates Court set aside the Tribunal's decision and remitted the matter to it for reconsideration.  On 10 August 2006 a differently constituted Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the application for a protection visa.  The applicant claimed to be of the Christian faith and to belong to the "Shouter" sect.  He claimed to have been arrested and detained on this account.  The Tribunal did not accept that the applicant was a witness of truth.  On the basis of his lack of knowledge of the "Shouter" sect and of Christianity the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a Christian, and therefore faced serious harm for a Convention reason.

2. On 29 June 2007 the Federal Magistrates Court (Emmett FM) dismissed an application for review of the Tribunal's decision. Her Honour rejected claims of bias on the part of the Tribunal and of breach of s 91R of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). Her Honour rejected claims that the applicant was denied procedural fairness and that the Tribunal failed to assess the applicant's chances of being persecuted if he returned to China.

3. The Federal Court (Sundberg J) dismissed the applicant's appeal on 16 November 2007.  His Honour found no error in the Federal Magistrate's approach to the allegation of bias, and rejected claims that the Tribunal had relied upon irrelevant evidence and that there was no evidence to support its decision.  His Honour held that the Tribunal's decision was based primarily on its adverse assessment of the applicant's credibility.  The Tribunal's decision flowed from that assessment, and its findings were open to it.

4. The application to this Court does not advance any question of law such as would justify the grant of special leave to appeal.  There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the decisions below.

5. Pursuant to r 41.10.5 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

W.M.C. Gummow	S.M. Kiefel
15 May 2008