Hariz, Mohamed v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1559

Hariz, Mohamed v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1559

The Tribunal placed the applicant on notice of its concern about the absence of published reports, made some inquiries about "El-Waha", and was not shown to have failed to make an inquiry it was legally required to make or to have denied procedural fairness. Its rejection of the alleged massacre, the cancellation of the conference, and the claimed police pursuit was a factual assessment open to it, not founded on non-existent facts or irrationality. Since the alleged massacre was rejected, it had no further role in assessing a well-founded fear of persecution. The grounds of review were not made out.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 December 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Final Judgment and Order
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'duty to Inquire' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'credibility Findings']
['migration Law' 'administrative Law' 'refugee Law'] ['protection Visa' 'refugee Review Tribunal' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Fairness' 'duty to Inquire' 'well Founded Fear of Persecution' 'credibility Findings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Review of Refugee Review Tribunal Decision Affirming Refusal of a Protection Visa / Final Judgment and Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed to act according to substantial justice and the merits of the case by making inadequate inquiries about the newspaper "El-Waha".' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal was required to inform the applicant that it proposed to reject his claim because it could not establish the existence of "El-Waha" and give him a further opportunity to respond.' "Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal dismissed too lightly the applicant's explanation that Algerian media was government controlled." 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal failed adequately to pursue questioning about possible persecution or discrimination by security forces.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal erred by relying on evidence of Dr Sadiki after one aspect of that evidence was shown to be incorrect.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal based its decision on an irrational presumption that all acts of violence would be reported in the media.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal made an adverse credit finding on the basis of non-existent facts.' 'Whether the Refugee Review Tribunal incorrectly interpreted the law by failing to ask "but what if I am wrong?" after rejecting the alleged massacre.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal placed the applicant on notice of its concern about the absence of published reports, made some inquiries about "El-Waha", and was not shown to have failed to make an inquiry it was legally required to make or to have denied procedural fairness. Its rejection of the alleged massacre, the cancellation of the conference, and the claimed police pursuit was a factual assessment open to it, not founded on non-existent facts or irrationality. Since the alleged massacre was rejected, it had no further role in assessing a well-founded fear of persecution. The grounds of review were not made out.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed with costs.']