1415650 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection visa by a citizen of Nepal. The applicant claimed he feared persecution in Nepal due to his political opinion as a former member of the Maoist party and his sexual orientation as a gay man. He asserted that he could not obtain protection from the Nepalese state and that relocation within Nepal was not a viable option. The review was conducted by Mara Moustafine, a member of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's claims were credible and, if so, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that his removal from Australia to Nepal would result in a real risk of him suffering significant harm. This involved assessing whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically considering both the refugee criterion and the complementary protection criterion.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's account of his past involvement with the Maoist party and his subsequent fear of reprisal from the police and army, as well as his fear of reprisal from the Maoist party itself. It also examined his claims regarding his sexual orientation, his inability to disclose this in Nepal due to a conservative Hindu upbringing, and his subsequent realisation that homosexuality was not illegal in Australia. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not satisfy the refugee criterion under section 36(2)(a) of the Act. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no suggestion that the applicant satisfied the criterion under section 36(2)(b) or (c) concerning being a member of the same family unit as a person who holds a protection visa. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.