 |
| The High Court upheld the Board's decision denying the Filipina's claim |
A Filipina who claimed to fear her abusive husband, whose ire was intensified by her having a child with a Pakistani while in Hong Kong, has failed to get High Court approval to appeal the denial of her application for asylum.
F. Cutchon, 56, has raised no valid reason to
challenge the decision of the Torture Claims Appeal Board “and there is
no ground for this court to interfere with it,” said the decision handed out last
Friday (April 5) by Allen Lee for the High Court Registrar, by order of Deputy High Court
Judge K.W. Lung.
“The role of this Court is supervisory, meaning that it
ensures that the Board complied with the public law requirements in coming to
its Decision on the applicant’s appeal. The Court will not usurp the fact-finding
power vested in the Director and the Board,” the Court of First Instance decision
added.
 |
| PINDUTIN DITO |
Cutchon arrived as a visitor in August 2010. She claimed she
wanted to flee her husband who had been assaulting her since two years after their
marriage in 1989.
She was arrested in September 2010 after overstaying for one
month, and filed an asylum claim with the Immigration Department on Oct. 11,
2010.
In her application, Cutchon claimed that her husband had murdered
one person before she met him and then killed two more, that his uncle was a
leader of the New People’s Army and that she was also being hunted by the
person who lent her money to fly to Hong Kong because she failed to repay her.
 |
| TAWAG NA! |
“The applicant was of the view that she could not seek
protection from the police because she had no money to bribe them,” the decision
noted.
The Immigration Director ruled on June 25, 2018 that her
reasons for seeking asylum did not fall under the three accepted grounds she
cited in her application: risk to life under the Hong Kong bill of rights (HKBOR),
risk of torture or of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under
the HKBOR and risk of persecution under the 1951 Convention relating to the
Status of Refugees.
When she appealed to the Board on July 13, 2018, it
affirmed the Immigration Director’s findings and noted that she exaggerated the
threats she faced, which had become remote rather than a real risk due to the
lapse of time.
 |
| PINDUTIN DITO |
Cutchon brought her case to the High Court on May 8, 2019 by
filing a leave for judicial review and requested an oral hearing.
“However, she did not turn up at the hearing before the
Court,” the court noted.
“The applicant fails
to show that she has any realistic prospect of success in her proposed judicial
review,” the court concluded.
 |
