SZIKN v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 This is an application for leave to appeal from a judgment of aFederal Magistratemade on 20 June 2006: SZIKN v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2006] FMCA 980. The judgment dismissed the applicant's application. The application sought judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) of 18 January 2006, delivered on 9 February 2006, to refuse to grant a protection (class XA) visa to the applicant. Leave is required because the orders of the Federal Magistrate were interlocutory: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 24(1A); Federal Magistrates Court Rules rr 44.11 and 44.12. 2 The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan who claims a fear of persecution by reason of his political membership of, and his activities as the general secretary for, his unit of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). The applicant claimed he protested against some PPP leaders who joined with the military regime and formed an active group to bring these leaders back to the party. Following a meeting with these leaders his group issued a press release saying these leaders were using the party for their own ends. The applicant claims that as a consequence these leaders arranged for the applicant to be arrested, his shop was looted and the authorities said they were unable to help him. He claims he was assaulted and harassed by the employees of these persons and the authorities would do nothing to protect him. 3 On 3 November 2005 a delegate of the first respondent refused to grant the applicant a protection visa. He then sought review by the Tribunal. 4 The Tribunal invited the applicant to attend a hearing on 18 January 2005 and notified him that it could not make a more favourable decision on the information before it. The applicant responded in writing that he did not wish to give oral evidence and consented to the Tribunal proceeding to make the decision. The Tribunal said in its reasons and findings that the applicant did not give the Tribunal the opportunity to explore his claims regarding his political profile, allegiance, activities and any consequences arising from these. The claims the applicant made lacked important details such as names and dates. The Tribunal was not satisfied the applicant had a leading position in attempting to end a split in his party. As a result, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution. 5 The applicant appealed to the Federal Magistrates Court. At the hearing on 21 March 2006, the applicant was expressly put on notice that his application could be dismissed if the Court was not satisfied that it raised an arguable case for the relief claimed (MZXGP v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2006] FCA 1075 per Black CJ at [14]). He was given an opportunity to obtain legal advice under the Court's panel advice scheme and to amend his application. 6 Before the Federal Magistrate the applicant asserted the following grounds: