JOHN QAMAR v. TORTURE CLAIMS APPEAL BOARD AND ANOTHER

HCAL 3805/2019

[2021] HKCFI 275

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST No. 3805 of 2019

Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Ord. 53 r. 3)

Following:

	consideration of the documents only; or
	consideration of the documents and oral submissions by (counsel for) the Applicant in open court / the Applicant being absent in open court;

The application for leave to apply for judicial review be dismissed.

Observations for the Applicant:

1.  The Applicant is a 36-year-old national of Pakistan who entered Hong Kong illegally on 6 June 2016 and surrendered to the Immigration Department on 22 June 2016 when he raised a non-refoulement claim on the basis that if he returned to Pakistan he would be harmed or killed by the local Muslim community over their religious issues.     

2.  By a Notice of Decision dated 28 March 2018 the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) rejected the Applicant’s claim on all the applicable grounds including risk of torture under Part VIIC of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap 115 (“torture risk”), risk of his absolute or non-derogable rights under the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance, Cap 383 (“HKBOR”) being violated including right to life under Article 2 (“BOR 2 risk”), risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of HKBOR (“BOR 3 risk”), and risk of persecution with reference to the non-refoulement principle under Article 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (“persecution risk”).

3.  In his decision the Director took into account of all the relevant circumstances of the Applicant’s claim and assessed the level of risk of harm from the local Muslim community upon his return to Pakistan as low due to the low intensity and frequency of past ill-treatment from them, that in the absence of any official involvement that state or police protection would be available to the Applicant if resorted to, and that reliable and objective Country of Origin Information (“COI”) show that reasonable internal relocation alternatives are available in Pakistan with a large population of 201 million people spread across a vast territory of more than 796,000 square kilometers that it would not be unduly harsh for the Applicant as an able-bodied adult with working experience to move to other part of Pakistan away from his home district in large cities such as Lahore, Islamabad or Karachi where it would be difficult if not impossible for him to be located.

4.  On 14 April 2018 the Applicant lodged an appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board (“the Board”) against the Director’s decision, and for which he attended an oral hearing on 20 November 2018 before the Board during which he gave evidence and answered questions put to him by the Adjudicator for the Board. On 22 February 2019 his appeal was dismissed by the Board which also confirmed the decision of the Director.

5.  On 20 December 2019 the Applicant filed his Form 86 for leave to apply for judicial review of both the decisions of the Director and the Board, and in his supporting affirmation of the same date he attached a copy of the Board’s decision and put forward various grounds for his intended challenge.

6.  However, before his application could be dealt with by the court, the Applicant on 10 November 2020 wrote to the court to request to “cancel” his application because he has settled his issues back home in Pakistan.

7.  As such and as the basis of his claim no longer exists, I accordingly accede to his request and dismiss his leave application.

Where leave to apply has been granted, Applicants and their legal advisers are reminded of their obligation to reconsider the merits of their application in the light of the Respondent’s evidence

Form CALL-1