Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Koubah v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1093 No question of principle
MOHAMMED ALI MAHMOUD KOUBAH v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS W 131 OF 2001 HELY J 10 AUGUST 2001 PERTH
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W 131 OF 2001
BETWEEN: MOHAMMED ALI MAHMOUD KOUBAH
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HELY J
DATE OF ORDER: 10 AUGUST 2001
WHERE MADE: PERTH
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application be 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
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY W 131 OF 2001
BETWEEN: MOHAMMED ALI MAHMOUD KOUBAH
APPLICANT
AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: HELY J
DATE: 10 AUGUST 2001
PLACE: PERTH
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application under Part 8 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act") seeking to review the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal ("RRT") given on 27 March 2001. By that decision RRT affirmed the decision of the Minister's delegate to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. 2 The applicant was born in Libya of Palestinian parents, who fled to Syria when the State of Israel was created in 1948. He is a stateless person. 3 The applicant left Syria on 20 October 2000 and arrived in Australia as an unauthorised boat arrival on 22 December 2000. He was taken into immigration detention, where he remains. 4 The applicant applied for a protection visa on the ground that he has a well-founded fear of persecution by reason of a religious and/or political opinion imputed to him by the Syrian government if he returns to his country of habitual residence, Syria. 5 The applicant went to Syria in 1982 with his family. He lived in Syria happily without any problems until August 2000. He claimed that on 25 August 2000 he was arrested, beaten and tortured by the intelligence service because he was suspected of being a member of the Al-Tahrir Party. He managed to escape from the authorities, and left Syria illegally. 6 RRT did not believe the applicant. It was not satisfied that he was ever detained in the manner he claimed and for the reason he claimed. RRT found that the applicant was not, and would not be, a person of interest to the Syrian authorities for the reasons he claimed. In RRT's view he is not a refugee from Syria. 7 RRT did not accept that the applicant left Syria illegally. He had a Palestinian travel document when he left Syria with a visa to enter Indonesia. The applicant has sufficient links with Syria (at CB 141 RRT says: "Libya", but this is an obvious error) for him to be able to return to Syria and to live his daily life there in the same manner as Syrian citizens. 8 RRT found that the mere fact of being a Palestinian in Syria is not a source of persecution. It also rejected the applicant's claim that the fact of his birth in Libya meant that he was not afforded the same assistance as other Palestinians in Syria.
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