1505109 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration's decision to refuse to grant protection visas to three applicants, nationals of Jordan. The applicants, a mother and her two children, had previously applied for protection visas in 2012, relying on their membership in the family unit of Mr A, who claimed fear of persecution in Jordan due to his homosexuality. That application was refused, affirmed by the Refugee Review Tribunal, and subsequently remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration by the Federal Circuit Court. The applicants lodged a further application in May 2014, asserting their own claims for protection.

The court was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under s.36 of the Migration Act 1958. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the applicants were persons in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention), or under the complementary protection criterion, which requires substantial grounds for believing that removal from Australia would result in a real risk of significant harm. This involved evaluating the credibility of the applicant mother's claims of fear of persecution or harm upon return to Jordan, including allegations of harassment, discrimination, physical and emotional abuse from her family, Mr A's family, and society, as well as fears for her children's safety and well-being.

The court found that the applicant mother's claims lacked sufficient credibility and supporting evidence. While acknowledging the applicant mother's stated fears, the court noted her comments throughout the hearing suggesting she knew her application would be refused and that her case was hopeless. The court considered the applicant mother's claims of potential harm from her family, Mr A's family, and society, as well as the specific fears for her children, including the daughter being forced into marriage and the children being kidnapped by Mr A's family. However, the court was not satisfied that these fears were well-founded or that there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of their removal from Australia.

Consequently, the court affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants protection visas, finding that they did not satisfy the criteria set out in s.36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act, nor the related criteria in s.36(2)(b) or (c).