Ekermawi v Commonwealth of Australia [2025] FCA 1141
Justice Perry summarily dismissed two proceedings brought by Mr Samir Ekermawi against Services Australia (SA) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), alleging racial discrimination under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA) and international law.
Mr Ekermawi, a Palestinian-born Australian citizen, claimed that the Commonwealth’s refusal to allow “Palestine” to be recorded as his country of birth in official systems (Centrelink and passport databases) constituted unlawful racial discrimination and breached his human rights. He sought declarations, damages, and orders requiring the Commonwealth to insert “Palestine” into its systems.
The Court found:
- There is no human right to have a particular place of birth recorded in government records. The RDA does not confer such a right, nor does the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).
- The evidence showed Mr Ekermawi could record “Palestine” in hard copy applications and that DFAT allowed options such as “Occupied Palestinian Territories” or “British Mandated Palestine” in its internal systems.
- The inability to select “Palestine” did not affect eligibility for social security or passport renewal. Citizenship, not birthplace, determines entitlement.
- Mr Ekermawi failed to identify any specific act that breached ss 9, 10, 17, or 18C of the RDA. His claims were vague, lacked legal foundation, and did not raise any substantial factual or legal dispute.
- The relief sought—requiring recognition of Palestine—was non-justiciable and fell outside the Court’s jurisdiction, as recognition of foreign states is a matter for the Executive under Chapter II of the Constitution.
Accordingly, the Court held that the applications had no reasonable prospects of success and dismissed them under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), with costs awarded to the Commonwealth.
Key Points
Mr Ekermawi alleged racial discrimination under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA) after Services Australia and DFAT refused to record “Palestine” as his country of birth in official systems. He claimed this breached his human rights and caused marginalisation.
Justice Perry summarily dismissed the case, finding:
- No human right exists to have a specific birthplace recorded in government databases.
- The RDA does not guarantee such a right, nor does ICERD.
- Evidence showed Mr Ekermawi could write “Palestine” on hard copy forms and request internal codes like “British Mandated Palestine.”
- His eligibility for services or passports was unaffected by the birthplace listing.
- The relief sought—requiring recognition of Palestine—was non-justiciable and outside the Court’s jurisdiction.
- No actionable breach of ss 9, 10, 17 or 18C of the RDA was identified.
The Court held the claims had no reasonable prospect of success and dismissed both proceedings under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court Act, awarding costs to the Commonwealth.