In Zakinov v Gibson a former national of Israel applied for refugee status in Australia on the basis of what he alleged to be persecution arising out of his genuinely held conscientious objections to any form of military service. A psychologist was called before the Refugee Review Tribunal (’“the Tribunal”) to buttress his case. The Tribunal permitted the evidence but gave it minimal weight The refugee seeker appealed on this basis but lost in the Federal Court Justice North’s judgment contains a worrying backlash against mental health professionals’ evidence, perhaps arising out of the circumstances of the case, citing the context in which a forensic assessment takes place to justify little weight being given to it. It is argued that such an approach lacks justification and has worrying ramifications. © 1997 Taylor ‖ Francis Group.

[No Keywords available]

refugee Israel forensic psychiatry Australia Article military service human legal aspect