[ad_1]
A woman’s request for a judicial review of the cancellation of her passport on national security grounds was denied in High Court. Photo / Greg Bowker
A woman whose passport was canceled because she was believed to be planning to facilitate a terrorist act for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant had her request for judicial review denied.
The woman, who has permanent name suppression, requested a review after her passport was suspended and later canceled in 2016 and the Superior Court today published Judge Dobson’s decision.
On April 19, 2016, the Acting Minister for Home Affairs suspended the woman’s passport for 10 working days because a report on the possible cancellation of her passport was in preparation and it was believed that she would leave New Zealand before it was finished.
On May 2, the Home Secretary, then Peter Dunne, decided to cancel the woman’s passport using the section of the Passport Act 1992 that allows cancellation if the minister believes on reasonable grounds that the person is a danger to the person. security of a country. other than New Zealand because the person intends to facilitate a terrorist act.
Dunne informed the woman that her decision was based on information provided by the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service, most of which was classified.
“I believe, for reasonable reasons, that you have been involved in activities of security concern. Specifically that: you previously attempted to travel to Syria to join the
State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in August 2015; and he intends to participate in, or facilitate, an act of terrorism abroad … Specifically, that he maintains the intention of traveling to Syria to join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
“Therefore, I believe on reasonable grounds that it is a person who represents a danger to the security of another country because he intends to participate in or facilitate a terrorist act abroad (in the sense of section 5 of the Law of 2002 crackdown on terrorism), that the danger to that country’s security cannot be effectively averted by other means, and that cancellation will effectively prevent or impede its ability to participate in or facilitate a terrorist act, “said Dunne’s notice. .
The court heard that there were a number of factual issues included in the classified security information on which Dunne relied in making its decision.
These included the NZSIS assessment that she tried to go to Syria to join ISIL in August 2015, but was stopped by Turkish authorities on boarding on suspicion of attempting to enter Syria to marry an ISIL fighter and support the group.
He was reportedly traveling in a minivan with people of various nationalities believed to be ISIL sympathizers.
She was detained and interviewed before being deported from Turkey and had tickets to return to Australia, where she was a citizen, on September 4, 2015.
Instead of going to Australia, he changed flights in Kuala Lumpur, changed his appearance, and traveled the Middle East for several weeks.
“It appears that you were not allowed to enter some of the countries you traveled to. Your brother finally met you in Qatar and you traveled to Oman and then New Zealand, arriving on September 21, 2015. Upon arrival, informed New Zealand Customs that he had no intention of going to Syria, but was trying to visit family members in a refugee camp in Turkey. “
The NZSIS said that others believed that she had been planning to move in under ISIL for some time, that she had been accessing ISIL propaganda, and that she had referred to the marriage which they interpreted to mean that she intended to marry a ISIL fighter.
The NZSIS also assessed that it was likely responsible for online material that contained pro-ISIL content, had translated and disseminated pro-ISIL video material, and shared information online in support of the extremist group.
They said they indicated their support for ISIL, the ability to facilitate a terrorist attack through the dissemination of propaganda, and the ability to “share information that ISIL supporters could use as inspiration to travel to Syria and / or Iraq or to carry out attacks. interns in their own countries. ” .
In October 2015, the woman and her brother traveled to Indonesia, but were interviewed, detained and deported to New Zealand.
When his passport was suspended, he traveled from New Zealand to Australia relying on his Australian citizenship to gain entry.
“The NZSIS assessed that you intended to travel to Syria to join ISIL based on your previous travel attempt and information set forth above, along with other classified information indicating that you still wanted to travel to Syria.”
During her request for judicial review, the woman argued that the decision to cancel her passport was void because she reported its loss on April 22, 2016 and Customs had registered it as invalid, which meant that there was nothing to cancel.
The Crown argued that the document still had sufficient status to be the basis for a replacement if an application for a new passport was submitted until the Minister ordered the cancellation.
Dobson ruled that the discussion was “unsustainable and has not been done.”
The woman’s lawyer also invoked a wide range of grounds to challenge the legality of the cancellation based on classified information that was not known to the woman or the public on national security grounds.
Dobson again ruled that none of them were extended, so the request for judicial review was dismissed.
He noted that it is essential that the decision be “evaluated in the light of the context that was applied in April and May 2016.”
“It is not a decision that can be justified now, and there would probably be difficulties in justifying it from December 2017, when the minister accepted that [the woman] could apply for an additional passport. She has been free to do it since then, but she hasn’t. “
Dobson agreed to the permanent deletion of the name because “an extraordinary degree of prejudice would result in [the woman] if your current life was interrupted by care that would likely stem from your identification. “
“It is clearly evident that the report to the Minister and the circumstances in which the cancellation decision was made were largely a reflection of concerns shared in New Zealand and other similar jurisdictions at the time. Relatively shortly after the events relating to the Minister’s decision, the world had moved, ”he said.