Ahmad Ijaz v. Torture Claims Appeal Board / Non-refoulement Claims Petition Office

CACV 359/2020

[2021] HKCA 1412

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CIVIL APPEAL NO 359 OF 2020

(ON APPEAL FROM HCAL NO 1737 OF 2018)

________________________

BETWEEN

________________________

Before:  Hon Yuen and Au JJA in Court

Date of Written Submissions:  8 March 2021

Date of Judgment:  27 September 2021

________________________

J U D G M E N T

________________________

Hon Yuen JA (giving the Judgment of the Court):

1.This court (Hon Lam VP and Yuen JA)  handed down judgment on 18 February 2021 ([2021] HKCA 174)  (“the Judgment”)  dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an order of DHCJ K W Lung (“the Judge”)  given on 31 July 2020 refusing to give the applicant leave to apply for judicial review in respect of his non-refoulement claim (“the Judge’s Decision”).

2.On 12 August 2020, the applicant filed a Notice of Appeal in CACV 359/2020 before this court to appeal the Judge’s Decision.  For reasons set out in the Judgment, it was dismissed. 

3.On 25 February 2021, the applicant filed a Notice of Motion for leave to appeal the Judgment to the Court of Final Appeal on the following grounds:

“Respected Sir/Madam, it’s my humble request to you that I have problem in own country please give me some time to stay here so that I can solve my problem. At this moment I cannot go back to my home country because danger still there for me. Please allow me to process further my case. I will be great full your kindness.”

4.Pursuant to the directions made by the Registrar of Civil Appeals on 1 March 2021, the applicant lodged his written submissions on 8 March 2021.  The Registrar further directed that the Notice of Motion shall be determined on paper only without an oral hearing.  As it is appropriate to do, we proceeded to determine this application on paper. 

5.In his written submissions, the applicant advanced the following grounds:

(1)  His life will become worse if refouled and he was not satisfied with all the decisions made in his case.

(2)  The points in his case were ignored and the decisions were not transparent.  The situation of his country is much different from what the decision-makers might think and it is hard for him to live and stand in front of his enemies.

(3)  Torture and deaths are common in police custody in Pakistan.  The police and other law making authorities are corrupt and would only support those people who bribe them.  It is difficult to get justice except for the rich and powerful people.

(4)  He was not satisfied with the decision made by the Torture Claims Appeal Board because it ignored many things related to his case and the actual situation of his home country.

(5)  It was impossible for him to go back to his home country at the present stage and he urged the court to understand his problem and let him stay in Hong Kong until his problem is solved.

6.Section 22(1)(b)  of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal may be granted if 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.

7.The applicant’s intended appeal has no merit at all.  No question of great general or public importance has been identified as required by s.22(1)(b)  of the HKCFAO.    

8.Nor do we see any basis for the “or otherwise” limb under section 22(1)(b).

9.By reason of the above, the Notice of Motion filed on 25 February 2021 is dismissed.

The applicant, unrepresented, acting in person