Z v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

The case before the court involved Z, an Iranian citizen, who sought judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) which had refused to grant them a protection visa. The core issue was whether Z would face persecution if returned to Iran, based on their alleged involvement in sexual offences under Iranian law. The application for judicial review was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court were whether the enforcement of a law of general application could amount to persecution for a Convention reason, and whether Z was at risk of selective prosecution or excessive punishment under the Iranian legal system. Additionally, the court had to determine if the RRT had failed to obtain crucial information that was central to its decision.

The court found that the general enforcement of Iranian laws concerning sexual offences did not constitute persecution for a Convention reason, as it did not target Z for any specific reason beyond their legal status. The court held that the risk of selective prosecution or excessive punishment was not substantiated by the evidence presented. Furthermore, the court ruled that the RRT had not failed to obtain important information, as the evidence available was sufficient for the Tribunal to make its determination. Consequently, the court dismissed Z's application for judicial review and ordered that Z pay the respondent's costs.