Justice Jayne Jagot's Zelman Cowen Lecture addresses far right anti-semitisim without making any reference to the Muslim Brotherhood

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Justice Jayne Jagot(photo above)of the High Court recently delivered the  2023 Zelman Cowen Lecture. Her Honour spoke to the issue of anti-semitisim emanating from the far right in Australia  , but then found it possible to not make any reference to the far right  Muslim Brotherhood organistaion, who are present in Australia.

To Be Read With 

Thursday, October 19, 2023

Australia may be paying the price of granting Muslim Brotherhood members political asylum-Meanwhile Albanese and his terrorism expert Anne Aly will still not ban the movement which has been declared illegal in even Saudi Arabia

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

             Posted on Twitter/X by Nick Riemer

The SMH reported in 2013 tha the The Muslim Brotherhood is active in Australia.  There is nothing to suggest tha the Brotherhhod members concerned have been deported. 

Australia granted members of the Muslim Brotherhood political asylum on the basis of the membership of the Brotherhood. These may well be the persons who are now planning and instigating  disruption of the type above, and the protests that we are seeing in Australian cities.

Even Saudi Arabia considers the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist threat, but not the Australian Government.

END 

To Be Read With 

The following is a collection of cases that were heard by the Refugee Review Tribunal,and higher courts , where the applicants sought protection on the grounds of persecution because of political beliefs; in these cases evidenced by their membership of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In all these cases ,where the appeals have been successful, the decision was based on findings of whether the applicants had successfully proven membership of the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

These cases must be read in full,but  I have provided some excerpts so as to summarise the issue.

 

There are other cases (and these are larger in number) where the appeal failed because the applicant could not prove membership of the Muslim Brotherhood to the satisfaction of the tribunal or court.

 

 

 `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

The Cases

 

RRT Reference: N01/38786

Date decision made: 31 July 2002

....the Applicant claims that he has suffered and fears persecution in Syria because of political views which will be imputed to him because he has previously served several years imprisonment for being involved with the Muslim Brotherhood.

DECISION

1. The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RRT Reference: N95/09809-June 1996

 

DECISION UNDER REVIEW

This matter concerns a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (the Minister), in effect, to refuse to grant the Applicant a protection visa, as provided for under the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). The Applicant was represented by a solicitor from Legal Aid.

In 1984 the Applicant joined the Muslim Brotherhood  in Hyderabad. He said this was only possible by invitation from existing members. He had become significantly involved through his activities in the Muslim Student Union

 

Decision: The Tribunal remits the application for consideration in accordance with the direction that the Applicant must be taken to have satisfied the criterion that he is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention

 

M196 of 2002 v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR

[2005] FMCA 1650

 

MIGRATION – Refugee Review Tribunal – protection visa – confusion regarding meaning of 'jihad' and political group 'al Jihad' – whether denial of procedural fairness – reliance of textbook extract not put to applicant – whether jurisdictional error – whether breach of s.424 of Migration Act.

 

.

The applicant before this court relies upon an application filed 1 September 2004 seeking judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) dated 3 July 2001. In its decision the Tribunal affirmed a decision of the first respondent's delegate to refuse to grant to the applicant a protection visa.

.	The applicant is a citizen of Egypt who arrived in Australia on 7 March 2000. He travelled on an Egyptian passport issued in Kiev on 14 September 1999 and valid to 13 September 2006. When he arrived in Australia on 7 March 2000 he was the holder of a tourist short stay visa. Before he arrived in Australia the applicant has resided in the Ukraine for over five years.
6.	On 20 March 2000 the applicant lodged an application for a protection visa, and on 8 May 2000 a delegate of the first respondent refused to grant the visa. The applicant then applied for review of that decision to the Tribunal on 1 June 2000.

 

"5. I have known the  Muslim Brotherhood  for as long as I can remember. In around 1990, while I was still doing my national services, I was approached through men I knew from the mosque to become involved in the Muslim Brotherhood . I was invited to join the prayer groups and meetings. At this stage Islamic movements in Egypt were on the rise and I had friends who were joining  Muslim   Brotherhood  and other organisations.
6. I was interested in the  Muslim Brotherhood  because of my commitment to the Muslim faith. The mosque that I attended most was in (Y) although I also went to other mosques in surrounding towns. The Muslim Brotherhood  was fairly strong in (Y).
7. Part of the reason that I was invited to join the Muslim Brotherhood  was because I am a part of a big family in the (Y) area. I was asked to spread the Muslim Brotherhood  message through my extended family.
8. I did not tell my immediate family about my involvement in the Muslim  Brotherhood . I did not want them to know because I knew they would not approve as they knew the Muslim Brotherhood  was an illegal organisation and that people were sometimes being arrested. The only one I told about my involvement in the Muslim Brotherhood  until I was forced to leave was my younger brother, (M)." (Court book page 40)

 

 

RRT Reference: N96/12875 (10 November 1997)

Decision: The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention

FINDINGS AND REASONS

The Tribunal found the applicant to be a credible witness and accepts his claim that he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood . The applicant appeared sincere in describing his belief in the Brotherhood's aims, and the applicant's witness was credible in describing how he had been satisfied that the applicant was a member of the  Muslim Brotherhood  as he claimed. The Tribunal also accepts as factual the communication from the  Muslim Brotherhood  attesting to the applicant's membership of the group. The signatory to that document is a member of a family with a very high profile in the Brotherhood. One of the Bayanuni family is currently the controller-general of the Brotherhood (see BBC Monitoring Service, above).

 

The applicant therefore has a well-founded fear of persecution by the Syrian authorities, because of his political opinion and religious beliefs as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood , if he returns to Syria.

CONCLUSION

The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol. Therefore the applicant satisfies the criterion set out in s.36(2) of the Act for a protection visa.