Muhammad Sajjad Kamaruzzaman, or popularly known as Sajat is now in Australia. She has settled down well in her cute little home in a Sydney suburb and appears to be happy in her new life.
However, the Malaysian authorities are not at all happy. They were hell bent on criminally punishing her for cross-dressing as a woman in Malaysia, an offence under Malaysian Syariah law. Fearing for her safety and freedom, Sajat fled to Thailand, sought asylum status and was eventually granted that status by Australia. The Shah Alam Syariah Court has issued an arrest warrant to compel her attendance in the Syariah Court.
Now that Sajat’s location overseas is known to all and sundry, can the Malaysian authorities force the Australian authorities to arrest Sajat in Sydney and deport her back to Malaysia where she will face criminal charges in the Shah Alam Syariah Court?
The quick answer is no.
Unlike Malaysia, Australia is a party (i.e. a contracting state) to the 1951 Refugee Convention. Specifically, Article 33(1) embodies the principle of non-refoulement, which essentially prohibits Australia from deporting Sajat to Malaysia.
See: https://lnkd.in/gZBD9tz6 (at paragraph 5)
The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of nationality “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”
It then appears that the Malaysian authorities may have unwittingly helped Sajat qualify for protection under the 1951 Refugee Convention when they filed criminal charges against her (for cross-dressing) and subsequently obtained an arrest warrant against her. These enforcement actions contributed directly to Sajat’s “well-founded fear of being persecuted”.
She is now safe, because of these actions.
Ironic indeed.
