The High Court has directed the Minister for Justice to withdraw the revocation of Morris Ali’s refugee declaration after finding that the decision relied on an inaccurate and unsupported account of his case.
Mr Justice O’Keeffe’s ruling concerned a statutory appeal under section 21(5) of the Refugee Act 1996. The Minister had revoked Ali’s refugee status in March 2010, following his convictions for possessing drugs for sale or supply and possessing a false South African passport. He had received concurrent prison sentences of 18 months and 12 months respectively.
The Minister’s consideration described the drug as crack cocaine and referred to multiple drug convictions. At the hearing, the respondents accepted that the drug reference was inaccurate and that Ali had only one drug conviction. The court also heard that claims he possessed drug-making equipment and was a “serious player” in drug activity had no factual basis. A weighing scale was in his possession, but the court said the unsupported claims could not be relied on.
The Minister’s review had also treated the conviction as evidence that Ali was a danger to the State and community. The judgment said the review should have considered whether the offence met the test of a “particularly serious crime” on an informed and correct version of the facts. The judge found the overall consideration was not a fair and accurate summary of the admitted facts and was not prepared reasonably or sufficiently to inform the Minister.
The court admitted limited portions of an affidavit Ali swore in 2011 addressing disputed matters that emerged from the respondents’ evidence. The judge noted that this evidence had not been challenged by cross-examination or a further affidavit. He adopted a prior High Court ruling that a section 21(5) appeal is distinct from judicial review and may be decided on evidence available at the appeal hearing.
The judge was not satisfied that the Minister had acted reasonably in preparing and deciding the revocation proposal. He ordered the Minister to withdraw the revocation. The ruling did not itself decide the separate challenge to the compatibility of the legislation and regulations with the Refugee Convention or European law.