Jagjeet Singh v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CACV 580 /2020

[2021] HKCA 811

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 580 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 965 OF 2018)

________________________

________________________

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Kwan VP (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.This is the applicant’s Notice of Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal (Kwan VP, Cheung JA and Chu JA) handed down on 10 May 2021 ([2021] HKCA 642). The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against the decision of Deputy High Court Judge C P Pang dated 15 October 2020 ([2020] HKCFI 2638) dismissing the application for leave to apply for judicial review concerning his non-refoulement claim.

2.Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Practice Direction 2.1, the Registrar of Civil Appeals had directed on 13 May 2021 that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  The applicant lodged his written submissions on 20 May 2021.  Having considered his submissions, we think it appropriate to determine this application on paper.

3.The applicant is a national of India.  He came to Hong Kong to seek non-refoulement protection on 21 April 2015.  His claim was made on the basis that if he returns to India he will be killed by the people of Shiromani Akali Dal (“SAD”) because he refused to join SAD and he also fears that he will be arrested as he was falsely accused of being connected with a murder case. 

4.His non-refoulement claim was rejected by the Director of Immigration (“the Director”) on 10 August 2015 and 5 June 2017.  His appeal against the Director’s decisions was dismissed by the Torture Claims Appeal Board(“the Board”) on 21 May 2018. 

5.He filed a Form 86 on 29 May 2018 to seek leave to apply for judicial review against the decision of the Board.  His application was refused by DHCJ Pang on 15 October 2020.

6.On 27 October 2020, the applicant filed a Notice of Appeal against the decision of DHCJ Pang.  The appeal was dealt with on paper as the applicant consented to the disposal of his appeal on paper by the Court of Appeal.  It was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 10 May 2021.  The applicant filed a Notice of Motion on 12 May 2021 for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.

Grounds of appeal

7.In his Notice of Motion, the applicant reiterated that he cannot go back to his home country because danger is still there and requested for some time to stay here to solve his problem.

8.His contentions in his written submissions may be summarized as follows:

(1)     He is not satisfied with the Board’s decision as they ignored many things which are related to his case.  There are lots of differences between what they thought and the actual situation in his home country;

(2)     Torture and deaths are so common in police custody of innocent people because they do not have any fear from anyone.  They just give support to people who give them bribe;

(3)     There are many examples related to his case on YouTube or on the internet showing how people like him are treated in his country. In that fearful environment, it is not possible for him to go back;

(4)     Even if someone like him is willing to report to the police, the police will tell those powerful people about the complaint and powerful people use their political influence on the police and other law making authorities.  People who want to become a witness against them may disappear or be killed.  It is very difficult to get justice in that corrupt environment;

(5)     His well-wishers are doing their best to solve his problem and may reach some fruitful conclusion in the future.  But at this moment, it is not possible for him to go back.

Analysis and disposition

9.Section 22(1)(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, Cap. 484, provides that an appeal shall lie to the Court of Final Appeal at the discretion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, from any judgment of the Court of Appeal in any civil cause or matter, whether final or interlocutory, if, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Final Appeal, as the case may be, the question involved in the appeal is one which, by reason of its great general or public importance, or otherwise, ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for decision.

10.In the present application, the applicant has not demonstrated that the Court of Appeal was wrong in rejecting his appeal.  His assertions are not supported by any concrete evidence.  He has not provided any reasonable explanation for the inconsistencies and implausibility in his account of events identified in the Board’s decision.  He has also failed to identify any question of great general or public importance which ought to be submitted to the Court of Final Appeal for determination in accordance with section 22(1)(b).  There is also no basis for granting leave on the ‘or otherwise’ limb under section 22(1)(b). 

11.We therefore refuse to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and dismiss his Notice of Motion filed on 12 May 2021.

The Applicant (Appellant), acting in person