NAUJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 43

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAUJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 43 NAUJ v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS N919 OF 2003 HEEREY, SUNDBERG & CRENNAN JJ 4 MARCH 2004 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N919 OF 2003

On appeal from a single judge of the Federal Court

BETWEEN: NAUJ

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HEEREY, SUNDBERG & CRENNAN JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 4 MARCH 2004

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is dismissed with costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N919 OF 2003

On appeal from a single judge of the Federal Court

BETWEEN: NAUJ

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: HEEREY, SUNDBERG & CRENNAN JJ

DATE: 4 MARCH 2004

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The appellant, a citizen of Thailand, entered Australia on 16 December 2002. On 28 January 2003 she applied for a protection visa. A delegate of the Minister refused this application. The appellant sought relief under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). A judge of this Court dismissed that application: NAUJ v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 1992. 2 The appellant now appeals against that decision.

Appellant's claims 3 In her visa application the appellant claimed that she feared persecution in Thailand on the grounds of her religion as a Muslim. She said she was born in Lampong, in the north of Thailand, and received her education in Bangkok. She and her family were "seriously discriminated against by the local community and the government offices". Since ninety-one per cent of Thai people are Buddhist they dislike Muslims. 4 She moved to Songkhla in the south of the country in 1994. There was a majority of Muslims in this area. Since 2001 Muslim extremists had bombed police stations, train stations, hotels and government offices and shot dead two police officers in an ambush just outside the appellant's village. The police force, who are Buddhist, then took revenge to search for Muslim killers. "Both parties" (presumably police as well as Muslim extremists) destroyed the appellant's family's shop by bombing. Her mother was injured and all goods destroyed. The police rejected their claim for compensation. The police arrested six Muslim killers. The appellant fears the Muslim killers intend to kill her because they think her father has informed on them. She does not think the authorities in Thailand will protect her and her family because they cannot protect their own police. The local government in Songkhla will not protect them because they are Muslim.