SZEMK v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 317

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZEMK v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2006] FCA 317 SZEMK v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS AND REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL NSD 2530 OF 2005 STONE J 28 MARCH 2006 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2530 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZEMK

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT JUDGE: STONE J

DATE OF ORDER: 28 MARCH 2006

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal 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

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 2530 OF 2005

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: SZEMK

APPELLANT

AND: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS

FIRST RESPONDENT

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE: STONE J

DATE: 28 MARCH 2006

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 The appellant, a citizen of India, arrived in Australia in January 2004 and applied for a protection visa on 29 January 2004. He claimed to fear harm from political opponents because of his involvement with his uncle's political party the Indian National Congress Party ('INCP'). The appellant claims that he was involved in election campaigning with his uncle and recruiting young men to the INCP and that he was a leader of the 'youth congress'. The appellant claims that in October 2003 his uncle's political opponents beat him up and abducted him, threatened to kill the appellant's family and threatened to attack the appellant again if he continued to recruit young men for politics. The police agreed to investigate but after two months indicated that they could not find the perpetrators, and could not do much more to assist because of the lack of information provided by the appellant. 2 The appellant also claimed that following a rally in December of 2003 he was attacked in a juice shop. The police attended the scene of the attack and gave the appellant a lift home. Further details of the appellant's claims can be found in the decision of Federal Magistrate SZEMK v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 1860.