SAAU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 626

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SAAU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 626

No issue of principle SAAU v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS S 209 OF 2001 O'LOUGHLIN J CANBERRA (HEARD IN ADELAIDE) 17 MAY 2002

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 209 OF 2001

BETWEEN: SAAU

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: O'LOUGHLIN J

DATE OF ORDER: 17 MAY 2002

WHERE MADE: CANBERRA (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The Application be dismissed. 2. The Applicant pay the Respondent's costs, such costs to be taxed in default of agreement. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY S 209 OF 2001

BETWEEN: SAAU

APPLICANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: O'LOUGHLIN J

DATE: 17 MAY 2002

PLACE: CANBERRA (HEARD IN ADELAIDE)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant, who is a citizen of Iran, arrived in Australia on 13 April 2001 on a boat that was code-named "Jumbunna". He was then aged forty-eight. He is married and has three children, all of whom are living with their mother in Iran. Three months or so after his arrival, he lodged an application for a Protection Visa with the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ("the Department") pursuant to the provision of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ("the Act"). That application was, however, unsuccessful; a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs ("the Minister") refused to grant the Protection Visa as did the Refugee Review Tribunal ("the Tribunal") who reviewed the decision of the delegate at the request of the applicant. 2 In an application for an order of review of the Tribunal's decision by this Court, which appears to have been prepared on the applicant's behalf by a person with a command of English but without legal qualifications, the applicant claims that he is aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal. In his application he stated: "1. I am extremely aggrieved at this unfair RRT decision. She could not understand that I have escaped from imminent violence. 2. The RRT member could not relate to my grave problems and did not understand them. As the tapes of my interview clearly show she repeatedly cut me off during the hearing such that I did not get a fair chance to explain my problems in, Iran fully." The applicant claimed that if he were returned to Iran he feared that he would face persecution because of his past political, religious and social activities and contacts. He had three main areas of concern: · the circumstances of his former employment; · his matrimonial difficulties; and · his conversion to Christianity. In his accompanying affidavit, the applicant stated that he would forward his grounds of objection in due course. No such grounds have however been filed. The applicant gave evidence before the Tribunal; in addition, two witnesses gave evidence in his support. The first of them was also an applicant for a Protection Visa. He, like the applicant, claimed to have converted to Christianity since his arrival in Australia. The second was a Mr Abedi who had been contacted by the applicant before and after his arrival in Australia for information about Christianity.