1606516 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection visa by a woman from Egypt. The applicant claimed she feared harm from Muslims due to her son's relationship with a Muslim woman, Ms A, who had converted to Christianity. The applicant alleged that Ms A's family and a Sheik threatened her and her son, that her son was attacked and subsequently died, and that she herself had been threatened by men who forced their way into her home. She also stated she had mobility issues and was too old to relocate within Egypt. The case was heard by Linda Symons.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa, specifically under section 36(2)(a) of the Act, or alternatively, the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). This required the court to assess the applicant's claims of persecution and the real risk of significant harm she might face if returned to Egypt, considering the evidence presented and relevant policy guidelines and country information.

The court considered the applicant's claims, including the alleged threats, her son's death, and her fear of further harm from Muslim fanatics. It also noted the limited evidence provided, such as a medical report detailing her mobility issues and a letter from her migration agent indicating difficulty with a full interview. The court affirmed that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Act, nor was there any suggestion she met the criteria as a member of the same family unit as a person who held a Protection visa. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.