The man moved to New Zealand after researching safe countries for homosexuals to live in. Photo / 123rf
The man moved to New Zealand after researching safe countries for homosexuals to live in. Photo / 123rf
A homosexual Muslim who was told to "take medicine to cure his gayness" has been granted refugee status in New Zealand.
The decision from the Immigration and Protection Tribunal comes after his first application was declined because the tribunal didn't believe he faced a real chance of serious harm if he returned to India.
The Indian national, 32, first moved to New Zealand in 2018 after his ex-wife learnt about his sexuality and outed him to his family and community.
The man who has name suppression, claims to have no internal protection available to him in India. He fears discrimination and violence from members of his community and Muslim political parties.
He told the tribunal how New Zealand became an option for him after researching what countries were supportive of homosexuals.
"I looked on websites to try and find a country supportive of gay people. In 2018 I made an application for a New Zealand visitor visa. I was declined, so I submitted another, including false financial information and was approved."
He arrived in New Zealand and made a refugee and protection claim four weeks later.
His first application for refugee status through the Refugee Status Unit (RSU) was declined because the tribunal believed he didn't face serious harm if he was to return to India.
"In India, the man may encounter discrimination, harassment and hostility in some areas of life ... however, the chance of him suffering discrimination at a level of intensity and/or frequency to amount to serious harm does not reach the level of a real chance."
"It is not established that any exclusion would be a violation of the man's right to religion and a private life," the 2019 decision read.
The man moved to New Zealand after researching safe countries for homosexuals to live in. Photo / 123rf
After he appealed against the tribunal's decision, and had that declined too, he decided to accept his fate and telephoned his brother to tell him of his return to India.
But his brother told him "that if he was still gay," then he should not return home.
"My brother told me that members of Muslim political parties thought I had abused the laws of Islam, they told him they would find me through their networks and had circulated my photograph nationally ..."
"The reaction of the community would be dangerous, four people have been killed by political parties in the last two months," he said.
"My family and community cannot accept my homosexuality, it is against their Muslim identity, if I tried to come home I wouldn't be accepted."
The man gave evidence of an incident that occurred in late 2017 when he had returned to his hometown after his ex-wife had found him messaging and engaging in sexual relationships with men.
"I was apprehended by police in a park in my home city with another gay man, I was taken to the police station and was verbally abused."
"We were released after six hours, this is when I believe my local community learnt about my sexuality."
The man also told the tribunal that no one except the president of the Mosque knew about his sexuality in New Zealand.
"The president told me that I could still attend Mosque but that I shouldn't tell anyone of my sexuality."
"He told me to cancel my doctor because there was a medicine to cure gayness."
Senior lecturer in the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at Massey University Dr Negar Partow told the tribunal how a person of this culture is born Muslim and has no right to convert or to reject it.
"Gay Muslims must therefore ignore or hide one or the other pillars of their identity."
"One of the most educated states in India considers same-sex intercourse to be similar to their views of adultery, whereas a married person may be stoned to death if caught," she said in a report to the tribunal.
"He would have to live in an environment in which regular and severe discrimination becomes an integrated part of his everyday life."
Member of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal Annabel Clayton said that if the man was made to hide his sexuality, he would become deprived of a meaningful private life and it would cause serious harm.
"Wherever he might choose to live in India, he remains a homosexual man who belongs to a religion that is overwhelmingly opposed to same-sex relationships."
"To fit into the community he would have to hide his sexuality, he has a well-founded fear of being persecuted in India."
"This man is to be recognised as a refugee under the Refugee Convention," Clayton ruled.
