1506945 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Sri Lankan national of Singhalese ethnicity and Roman Catholic faith, sought protection in Australia. He claimed to fear persecution upon return to Sri Lanka due to his political activities supporting the UNP party. Specifically, he alleged he was beaten and injured during a political rally in January 2013, and subsequently, his friend was killed for his political opinions. The applicant further stated that individuals associated with the current government came to his home looking for him that same evening, leading him to flee. He also claimed his mother and sibling were assaulted when they were questioned about his whereabouts. The applicant contended that the authorities in Sri Lanka would not protect him, citing the lack of action regarding the killing of his friend and the assault on his family, and expressed a belief that he would be found and harmed even if he relocated within Sri Lanka. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa.

The AAT was tasked with assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, specifically political opinion, and whether he would be at risk of significant harm if returned to Sri Lanka. This involved evaluating the credibility of his claims regarding the incidents of violence, his political affiliations, and the alleged lack of protection from Sri Lankan authorities. The Tribunal needed to consider whether the fear of harm was objectively reasonable in the circumstances, taking into account the applicant's past experiences and the general country information pertaining to Sri Lanka.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's account of being beaten and injured at a political rally was credible, as was his claim that his friend was killed due to political opinion. It also accepted that individuals associated with the current government had sought him out following these events, and that his family had been harassed. Crucially, the Tribunal was persuaded that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, namely his political opinion. It concluded that the Sri Lankan authorities were unlikely to offer him protection, given the alleged impunity with which supporters of the current government acted and the lack of investigation into the reported incidents. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant would be at real risk of significant harm if returned to Sri Lanka. The AAT set aside the delegate's decision and remitted the matter to the delegate with a direction to grant the applicant a protection visa.