Filipina’s fear of husband killing her not enough ground for asylum, court says

 

The High Court, where Court of Appeal holds hearings

A Filipina who sought asylum because she was afraid her husband would kill her for having had two children with a Nepalese while in Hong Kong, has failed to get the Court of Appeal to reverse a ruling rejecting her claim for protection from forcible repatriation.

Jonalyn Lorenzo, a domestic helper who overstayed after her contract was terminated, claimed non-refoulement on July 31, 2017, but this was dismissed by the Immigration Department on Nov. 8, 2017 because it did not meet applicable grounds, including risk of torture and persecution.

She appealed the decision to the Torture Claims Appeal Board. When the Board dismissed her appeal, she went to the Court of First Instance which denied her leave to apply for judicial review, resulting in her bringing the case to the appellate court.

TAWAG NA!

In their decision issued this week, Justices of Appeal Thomas Au and Anderson Chow said: “The court will not intervene by way of judicial review unless there are errors of law or procedural unfairness or irrationality in the decision of the Board.”

They asserted that  Lorenzo fails "to identify or show with specific particulars any error in the Judge’s decision refusing to grant leave to apply for judicial review, or raise any viable ground of appeal against the Leave Decision."  

They also cited the Board’s findings that Lorenzo became an overstayer on Oct. 23 2011 and claimed to have been threatened by her husband since 2012.  However, she chose not to seek protection until 2017, indicating “that her claimed fear for her safety was not genuinely held.”

They added: “The Board found in all these years the husband had done nothing to the Applicant or her mother in the Philippines. It found his threats were merely empty threats which the husband had no intention to execute.  The risk of harm posed by the husband was low.”

They concluded: ”General assertions of her fear if refouled do not constitute proper grounds of appeal.”

Pindutin dito para sa iha pang mga detalye

PRESS FOR DETAILS