1515754 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of a female applicant from Nepal seeking a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm from both Maoists and her former husband, alleging she had been married off as a child and subsequently subjected to sexual and physical abuse. She asserted she had no family support in India and could not relocate there.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess whether the applicant qualified as a refugee under Article 1A(2) of the *Convention relating to the Status of Refugees* (as amended by the 1967 Protocol) or, alternatively, whether Australia had protection obligations under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. This involved considering whether she had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or a real risk of suffering significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to India.

The Tribunal found that the applicant would be particularly vulnerable to further gender-based violence in India as a single, unprotected woman, given her history of abuse and the general risk of violence against women in that country. It accepted that she had no family or social support available in India. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that there were substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk she would suffer significant harm in India. Applying these findings, the Tribunal concluded that section 36(3) of the Act did not apply, and that the applicant satisfied the criteria under section 36(2)(aa).

The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies section 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act*.