Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SAAS of 2001 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 340
SAAS of 2001 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs S 156 of 2002 HILL, BRANSON & STONE JJ 5 NOVEMBER 2002 ADELAIDE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 156 of 2002
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SAAS OF 2001
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HILL, BRANSON & STONE JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 5 NOVEMBER 2002
WHERE MADE: ADELAIDE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed.
2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 156 of 2002
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: SAAS OF 2001
APPELLANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HILL, BRANSON & STONE JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 5 NOVEMBER 2002
WHERE MADE: ADELAIDE
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT
Introduction 1 The appellant is a citizen of Iran who arrived in Australia on 3 January 2001. On 31 July 2001 he lodged an application for a protection visa. A delegate of the respondent refused this application on 20 August 2001. The Refugee Review Tribunal ('the Tribunal') affirmed the delegate's decision on 29 October 2001. On 11 June 2002 the primary judge dismissed an application to the Court for the decision of the Tribunal to be set aside. The appellant has appealed to the Full Court from the decision of the primary judge.
Background 2 The appellant was interviewed by an officer of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs soon after his arrival in Australia. At this interview the appellant stated that he was a Shiite Muslim and had worked for a steel conglomerate in Iran. He said that he had left Iran due to social and political problems in the country. These problems included lack of safety, religious prejudices and lack of freedom. 3 In his application for a protection visa and before the Tribunal, the appellant claimed that in 1999 he converted to Christianity. He said that he had run a coffee shop in a Christian health club. He said that the club was raided by Hefazat Etelaat who detained him for two days and were physically and verbally abusive towards him. He also claimed to have been a member of a Christian study group which distributed Christian books and publications. The appellant stated that he left Iran fearing that his life was in danger after one of the group was arrested. 4 Since his arrival in Australia, the appellant has been involved in Christian activities at Woomera Detention Centre. He has been baptised and confirmed and has completed a 'Bible in Outline' correspondence course. Sister Anne Higgins of the Woomera-Roxby Downs Catholic Parish, who works at the detention centre, gave evidence before the Tribunal. She spoke of the appellant's religious activities while in detention, and stated her belief that the appellant is sincere in his conversion. Father Jim Monaghan, the parish priest, wrote to both the Tribunal and the primary judge expressing similar views. 5 The appellant claims that if he is returned to Iran he will continue to practice Christianity and will proselytise. As a result he claims he will suffer persecution in Iran.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate