1610411 (Refugee)

1610411 (Refugee) [2019] AATA 6063 (18 July 2019)
DECISION RECORD
DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division
CASE NUMBER:  1610411
COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   Nigeria
MEMBER:David McCulloch
DATE:18 July 2019
PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney
DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.

Statement made on 18 July 2019 at 9:45am
CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Nigeria – religion – Christian – social group – refuses to join secret cult – claims cult members murdered family members – credibility issues – bogus documents – constructed protection claims around death of mother that happened in other circumstances – no real chance of serious harm – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5, 36, 65, 499
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2

CASES
Abebe v Commonwealth of Australia (1999) 197 CLR 510
MIEA v Guo & Anor (1997) 191 CLR 559
Prasad v MIEA (1985) 6 FCR 155
Randhawa v MILGEA (1994) 52 FCR 437
Yao-Jing Li v MIMA (1997) 74 FCR 275
Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependant.
STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).
The applicant who claims to be a citizen of Nigeria applied for the visa on 30 June 2014 and the delegate refused to grant the visa on 24 June 2016.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 12 July 2019 to give evidence and present arguments.
The Tribunal hearing was to have been conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Yoruba and English languages. It was only possible to source an interpreter to participate at the hearing by telephone. During introductory proceedings, the phone connection was very poor and it was difficult to properly communicate with the interpreter. Later, contact was lost with the interpreter entirely.
The applicant appeared to be able to communicate in English. At the beginning of the proceedings, the Tribunal indicated to the applicant that it would readily adjourn the proceedings to another day to enable another interpreter to be engaged. The Tribunal did note that the applicant spoke English and indicated that she had the option of continuing without an interpreter, however that decision was entirely up to her. The applicant said that she was able to continue the hearing in English.
The applicant appeared to properly understand and respond to questions that were asked of her in English.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s.36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s.36(2)(a), (aa), (b) or (c). That is, the applicant is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.
Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (together, the Refugees Convention, or the Convention).
Australia is a party to the Refugees Convention and generally speaking, has protection obligations in respect of people who are refugees as defined in Article 1 of the Convention. Article 1A(2) relevantly defines a refugee as any person who:
owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s.36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of a protection visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s.36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’).
In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.56, made under s.499 of the Act, the Tribunal is required to take account of PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Complementary Protection Guidelines and PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Refugee Law Guidelines and any country information assessment prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration. The Tribunal has before it DFAT Country Information Report – Nigeria, 9 March 2018 a copy of which was given to the applicant in the hearing.
The issue in this case is the credibility of the applicant and whether, on accepted claims, the criteria for protection are fulfilled. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.
Background and claims
The applicant applied for a [temporary visa] on 10 April 2014, and this was granted on 7 May 2014. The visit was in relation to [an event]. The applicant arrived in Australia [in] May 2014, and applied for a protection visa on 30 June 2014. The applicant’s [temporary] Visa ceased on the same day, and the applicant was granted a Bridging Visa A on 2 July 2014.
Prior to coming to Australia, the applicant visited [Country 1] from [May] 2012 to [later in] May 2012 for [an event]. The applicant also went to [Country 2] from [November] 2013 to [later in] November 2013 for a visit.
The following information is apparent from the application form. The applicant was born [in] Ibadan, Oyo, Nigeria. The applicant is a Christian of Yoruba ethnicity. The applicant speaks and writes Yoruba, and speaks, reads and writes English. The applicant completed her [schooling], and then a National Diploma in [year] from [a college in] Ibadan, and then a Higher National Diploma in [year] from the same institution. The applicant also completed National Youth Service [Corps]. The applicant worked as a [Occupation 1] for [Employer 1] from July 2010 to August 2011, and then at [Employer 2] until April 2014. The applicant worked as a [Occupation 2] at [Employer 3] from April 2012 to April 2014. The applicant was widowed [in] June 2014. The applicant has a [child] (born [year]) and [another child] (born [year]) in Nigeria. The applicant’s [sibling], niece and mother-in-law also live in Nigeria. The applicant lived in [a number of] different addresses in Ibadan.
The applicant provided a written statement setting out her background and claims as follows (not corrected for spelling or grammar):
With passionate appeal and for the major reason of life preservation and protection, I hereby would like to forward to your office, my application on the above subject matter.
Though I felt somewhat restrained to narrate my story in view of its rather unfortunate nature and complications; but I do not seem to have any other alternative choice than to relate it as honestly as it were; and as may be required of me in procedural terms to do so. I must say from a sore heart that at no time in my entire life have I found myself in such a sore strait, that my dignity, and esteem real worth as a young woman is so undermined. In view of this precarious situation I am in without consolation or hope somewhere except for such a considerate intervention from your good office and its notable humanitarian character. Here is my account in full:
My Name is [name deleted] (Nee [maiden name]) [age], from lbadan, Nigeria, married to [name deleted], [age], (now deceased) [in] February, 2010; a mother of two young children ([Details deleted]). My husband, a successful [occupation] turned a farmer, until his untimely death recently practised farming and ran a very large [farm]. [Produce] are cultivated with array of workers. He also had [another business]. He was such a loving, dutiful, faithful and committed husband any woman would wish to have. We loved each other dearly. He meant everything to me, he was so wonderful. I have lost true love and lover, confidant and best friend.
I would not hesitate to marry him again and again in another life's chance if the opportunity and choice present itself. He was my world. I really miss him.
I must say that my immediate family was a replicate of extended one. Our parents were role models and wonderful lovers too. They were caring, dedicated and disciplined. We, the children [were] well raised and enjoyed Reality Parenting Codes... Good home training, secular education, disciplined manners/etiquettes and proper mental regulating. Imbibing all these, we went further on our own as we grew up to cultivate proper self development. And for me I elected to add character and assiduity to my personal resourceful lifestyle values. My training in [Subject 1] as well as employment as a [Occupation 2] gave me a good leverage in this regard. And in this belief system value and mentality, I got married and intended to function in life to God's glory and humanity honour. Every thing around me and my life seemed promising toward this until the end of February 2014.
My father [died] [in] February 2014 of natural causes after a brief illness; having lived a successful life. He was a community opinion leader in his lifetime and was buried befittingly [in] March 2014.
During the burial rites of passage at his funeral, I, in particular, mum and [sibling] and assumedly other extended relations noticed a group of men of differing matured ages, all attired in [certain colours] attending and stood by in reverential homage at the general lying-in-state. I, in my naive self, did not attach an importance to it initially; thinking they were either the social club cronies (because he had special membership of some anyway) or the traditional representations of other community leadership associations. I got a call four days after from a man sounding elderly asking to see me first as the first born alone on some important and discreet matters concerning my late Dad and claiming to be so impressed on my conduct and courtesies during the funeral program as he and some elders closely observed.
Politely, I asked to be met with him at our family house in my mum's presence being the deceased only legal wife and surviving widow. In spite of his repeated preference for a dual chat with him, insisted and a meeting was fixed for [March] 2014.
We were told that my loving, urbane and conscientious Dad as I've know him in his lifetime was an active, high-ranking member of a local secret cult. Disbelieving their claims, the two men presented us with picture proofs of my Dad in the same [coloured] attired indicating their regular as worn by him with a [mark] and [an item] depicting his seniority level. Shocked beyond words, they spoke further on their [deleted] - (i.e. First born, Recruitment and Initiation succession reality of departed cult colleague) as their main reason for the visitation contacts in tandem with the fraternirt creed and stressing that it was non-negotiable because my Late Dad succeeded my Late Grandpa. I went dumb on hearing this judging from their facial and expressional countenances.
My mum asked them what the name of the cult was but the man answered my mum that until a member is initiated and some sacrifices made in that aspect, the name of the cult cannot be revealed to us at least at that moment.
Recovering slightly from our utter shock and disbelief, Mum and I expressed our opposition from moral, religious and gender standpoints. They countered and even forbade us to differ further but accept their demands. They advised us to consider doing all that was needed quickly to prevent further delay in preparing me for their demand.
At this stage, I went wild and almost lost my sanity. Disgusted I told them I will vehemently oppose any move by them to restrain them from lording their evil will on me in particular and my mother. The meeting ended in a deadlock, and they left in anger, with a four weeks order on us to comply, and a warning of the inevitable consequences of our stubbornness if we fail to do so; reminding us that we were mere women.
I told my husband everything while we decided reporting to the police and my mum informed my uncle of the whole incident to which they advised we inform the community elders and the police more so in view of their threat and the foreseeable harassment when the ultimatum expired. All these we did promptly.
I realised later from the elders evasive reactions and the Luke-warm handling of the matter by the police was a big blunder on our path to have informed them. And truly, it was as the unfolding event subsequently showed Expectedly I received their call two days earlier to the expiration time ([April]) reminding me and my mum of their second and final visit to conclude their earlier mission.
Telling the caller the needlessness to come because I, my mum and my immediate family would be travelling to Enugu, south east Nigeria for my [cousin’s] wedding that weekend.
Disbelieving this as true, the cultist warned me and my mum never to take them for granted by avoiding them as that may land us into trouble. He asked for our return date to which I did not give a definite answer, he asked again if we're truly travelling and to what part of Enugu [and] I told him the Area's name just to get him off my back. But how wrong I was because something unusual happened during the reception. Our [car] which was packed with three others of its brand became attacked by gunmen whose gunshot noise interrupted the almost ending reception program with full bullets holes on the side of the cars and the tyres.
The matter was reported and the policemen came, assessed the damages, had us and the other owners write statements. No arrests till we left 48hours later this time by air. The vehicle was later released [in] April. Repaired and returned to us from Enugu. It appeared that the assailants were unsure of which of the three identical [cars] belonged to us therefore they attacked the three. I and my mum as well as my husband read different meanings to the event this provokes the courage in us not to give in to fear and we planned our personal defence and protective strategies.
The [car] was taken to one of our family friend's house to be sold later.
However the evil men called again that same evening the third time; and this time my husband motioned to me not to talk to them while he took the phone and spoke to them.
The cultists on hearing my husband's voice asked him to mind his business and threatened him to stay clear in his own interest, after which they hung the phone on him from then on we left nothing to chance. We changed our numbers and Mum's number because she complained receiving unidentified call that same evening which she refused to answer the callers request but cuts the conversation. In addition someone was assigned to take mum's calls only if the caller is identified and listed on her phone. We also changed some domestic guards and even installed electronics security system, which included infrared pressure censors at both end and the farm office building as well.
However, [in] May 2014 while shopping for my weekend needs with my maid at the [shops] around evening someone called me at a walk by, pointing his index finger and said "... You and your mum think you're stubborn eh what happened to your mother will also happen to you too very soon no matter how long you try hide"(in Yoruba). He disappeared to the background crowd before I could figure his dark-goggled face. His statement got me startled and off balance. Frightened, I quickly dialled my mum's number which was ringing continuously without reply, then my husband's- unreachable then my mum's number severally again. I then called her brother (my uncle), and it was him that broke the bad news of my mum's painful death which according to him was few moments ago. I abandoned shopping immediately and asked my driver to head for my mum's place immediately. On getting there, I learnt she was cornered by two assailants, [and killed a] few houses away along the street while taking a walk as evening exercise after seeing off visiting friend to the Estate gate. It was a terrible sight to behold seeing my mother's lifeless body. The police stepped in, investigated, no arrest made all promises, assurance-sensationalism. She was buried that evening according to Islamic right being a Muslim. It was unbelievable, even like a drama.
Everything happened so fast I have lost my darling and supportive mother to known but undisclosed evil pranksters and their wicked antics.
Now deathly afraid, not even my husband's supportive assurance could completely guarantee the calming of my frayed nerves. I was tensed and always on my toes, taking pot-shots, avoiding darkness and any form of loneliness even at work. You can easily tell on seeing me that something was wrong because I look so hysterical.
And I was in this state until I left Nigeria for Australia living my husband and the kids behind with my mother in-law. This served as a momentary get away relief from a dead zone for me.
But my relief was short-lived. About four days after on calling home to talk to my husband. I was told by his [employee] that he had been shot dead on his farm on the evening hours [in] June 2014 (which was [day] June in Australia). With this my world came to an End. The loses are too much for me-first my dad, my mum, and last my husband all within a year.
It's obvious I would be the next target if I go back to Nigeria because these evil men would stop at nothing to kill me.
This is my tragic story. This is my plight. I have no one to talk to except you and your good office. Please help me. I must live.
The applicant also provided a Statutory Declaration dated 7 November 2014, elaborating on her background and claims as follows (not corrected for spelling or grammar):
I fear that if I were to be forced to return to Nigeria, I will be seriously harmed or killed on account of my religion and/or membership of a particular social group as a person who is a Christian and refuses to join a cult in Nigeria.
Since my direct refusal to join the cult on or around [March] 2014, I have been subject to threats and my mother and my husband were murdered.
I fear that I will not be protected by anyone, including the authorities, because the Nigerian Government and Police have no control over the cult and are unwilling to assist people targeted by the cult, and do not take action against any groups that target Christians.
My background
I was born in lbadan, Oyo state, [Nigeria].
I am the eldest of two [children]. My father was a [a certain occupation] and died of natural causes [in] February 2014 and my mother did home duties and was murdered and died [in] May 2014.
I married [my husband] in 2010 and we have two [children].
I was a Catholic, but I became a Baptist Christian when I married my husband.
In Nigeria I lived in lbadan where my husband ran a very large [farm].
I have a diploma in [Subject 1] and since 2012 I worked as a [Occupation 2].
Problems in Nigeria
In December 2013 my father called me and asked me to urgently visit him so he could tell me something very important.
My mother interrupted our conversation before my father could tell me any information, but he did tell me that the reason he was speaking to me was because I was the first child and I had responsibilities and things that I had to do in case anything happened to him.
At my father's burial [in] March 2014, my mother, my [sibling] and I noticed a group of men, dressed in [certain attire] that we did not know but who had come to pay their respects to my father.
We did not think that this was strange or particularly important at the time, and thought that they were some people or acquaintances my father knew.
Around 4 days later, I received a phone call from a man who told me that he was one of the group wearing the [certain attire] at my father's burial. He asked to meet with me as he had some important and discreet matters concerning my father to discuss with me.
The man requested that we meet alone but I insisted that my mother be present at the meeting since it concerned my father. Despite his repeated request for a meeting just between the two of us, I insisted that my mother’s be present at the meeting and we agreed to meet [in] March 2014 at my mother’s home.
[In] March 2014, three men came to my family home to meet with me and my mother.
At first, the men thanked and congratulated me for my conduct and manners at the burial, and asked if my father told me anything.
I did not understand why they were asking me this or what they thought my father may have told me.
The men explained to me that my father was an active, high ranking member of a local secret cult.
My mother and I expressed our disbelief to them because he had never said anything about belonging to a cult.
The men produced photographs of my father in the same [attire] that I had seen them wear at my father's burial, and they told us that he had a [mark] and [an item] because of his position of seniority in the cult.
The men then explained that the reason they wanted to meet with me was that they wanted to recruit me and initiate me into the cult. They advised me that as I was the first born child of a deceased member of the cult, I have no choice but to be initiated into the cult, in the same way my father was initiated when my grandfather died.
My mother asked for the name of the cult, but the men refused to reveal it, stating that until a succeeding member is properly initiated and a full commitment is promised, to maintain secrecy the name of the cult cannot be disclosed.
I had a strong suspicion that this cult was related to the Ogboni cult but I do not know the exact name or origins of the cult.
I told the men that I was strongly opposed to jointing the cult because I was a Christian and it was against my Christian faith to join a cult.
I also feared joining the cult as I had seen pictures of what cults do for initiations and pictures of rituals where members of cults brutally killed people by cutting off heads or parts of the body.
As it is against my religion to kill or harm anyone, I informed the men that I refused their demand to join the cult and asked them to leave.
Despite my refusal, the men continued to demand that I join the cult. They threatened me in Yoruba with words to the following effect:
"Do you know what will happen if you do not join?
Even men cannot defy us and you are merely women.
Who do you think you are? Why are you being so stubborn."
When I continued to refuse, they threatened me with an ultimatum of 4 weeks to give them an answer of acceptance, or else there would be "consequences "They did not elaborate further as to what these consequences might be.
When the men left, I called my husband and my mother called her younger brother to tell them about what happened. My mother's brother advised us to call the police.
My mother and I went to the police station to report what had happened and report the threats we had received. The police took a statement from us and told us that they would look into it and told us to come back in 5 days.
When I returned to the police station 5 days later, the police said they would look into it more but they did not take any action.
I did not receive any further contact from the police about the incident I reported to them.
On or around [April] 2014, 2 days before the ultimatum deadline, I received a phone call from one of the men reminding me that they would come visit on Saturday (the day of the ultimatum).
The man warned that this would be their final visit and that I should comply with their demands. I advised him that I would not be at my home because I was travelling to attend a wedding, and he threatened me with words to the effect of:
"You should not try and avoid us. There is no place you can go. If you try to run, we will find you and we will harm you."
The man asked when I would return from the wedding, but I did not give him a definite answer. He asked repeatedly whether I was actually travelling or just trying to avoid him, and asked me where the wedding was.
I wanted to get the man off the phone as soon as possible so I told him that the wedding was in Ertugu, so that he would stop questioning me.
[In] April 2014, my mother and I attended the wedding at Enugu. Towards the end of the reception, we heard multiple gun shots outside.
Everyone in the reception place laid on the ground and waited until it was safe to go out. When I went outside, I saw that my [car] and two other similar vehicles had bullet holes all the over the windscreen, the sides and the tyres as though they had aimed the driver seat specifically.
I do not know whether it was the men from the cult that put the bullet holes in my car, but the position of the bullet holes indicated that whoever was shooting at the care was aiming to kill the driver.
My mother and I went to the police station in Enugu to report the incident to the police who took a statement and attended the wedding reception place to tow away and inspect our vehicle.
The police did not make any arrests or inform me of any information they found out about the incident. They took no action following the incident report and only returned the car approximately one week later.
As the police had our car my mother and I returned to lbadan by airplane and received a phone call from one of the men from the cult shortly after we returned.
The man from the cult said words in Yoruba to the effect of: "You are not dead yet?"
My husband took the phone and told the man to stay away from me and mind his own business and hung up.
My mother also received calls from an unidentified number constantly, so for our safety we changed our personal numbers and the locks and gates at my house and my mother's house. We also installed electric fencing around my mother's house.
[In] May 2014, I was shopping with my maid at the [shops], a man with sunglasses came out from the crowd, called my name, pointed his finger at me and said words in Yoruba to the effect of:
"You and your mum think you are stubborn. What happened to your mum will also happen to you no matter how you try to hide"
The man disappeared into the crowd but his words frightened me. I called my mother a number of times but she did not pick up. As she did not pick up, I called my uncle who said he would go and check on my mother. My uncle then called me back and told me something had happened and I needed to come to my mother’s house as soon as possible.
When I arrived at my mother's house my mother's neighbour told me that the last time she saw my mother, she was seeing a friend off, and then a few minutes later heard a gun shot. I heard other people say that my mother was cornered by two people who [killed her].
I found my mother's body lying on the ground a few houses away from her house.
The police came to investigate but they did not take any actions to catch the murderer and never informed anyone in my family of how their investigations were going.
Following my mother's death, I became very afraid, I cried all the time. I was unable to focus at work, I was depressed. I was tense, jittery, nervous and scared to be alone.
One Sunday when I was at church, the windscreen of my car was smashed while I was inside the church. I do not know who did this but I believe it was someone connected with the cult.
My fear and grief was so bad that my husband suggested that I should go to Australia given that I had already been granted a visa to Australia in order to attend [an event].
Coming to Australia
I came to Australia by airplane [in] May 2014 for [an event].
I was able to contact my husband on the first and second days I was in Australia, but on the third day he did not pick up. I called the [employee] to tell him to check on my husband but the [employee] seemed to be trying to avoid my question.
The [employee] informed me that [in] June 2014, he observed some people walk into my house. He heard them get into an argument with my husband, and then heard gun shots and saw them drive away. The [employee] told me that my husband was dead and it was not safe for me to come home.
What I fear would happen if I was forced to return to Nigeria
I fear that if I were to be returned to Nigeria I would be seriously harmed and/or killed. Members of this cult have already killed my mother and my husband and the cult members know where I live.
The Nigerian state cannot protect me because I have tried obtaining help from the police on a number of occasions and they have failed to act effectively either to investigate or prosecute the cult members or to protect me or my family members.
I cannot relocate to a different part of Nigeria because the cult members can find me anywhere I go. They found me in Enugu which is approximately a 9hr drive away from lbadan. If they could find me in Enugu they can find me anywhere in Nigeria. Moreover, I am not sure but it is possible that this cult operates all throughout Nigeria, They seem like a very powerful cult.

The applicant also provided the following documents (in English):
- A copy of the applicant’s passport;
- Medical report on the applicant’s father, dated [March] 2014;
- Death certificate of the applicant’s father, dated [March] 2014;
- Police report regarding the murder of the applicant’s mother, dated [May] 2014;
- Medical report regarding the manner of death of the above, [details deleted], dated [May] 2014;
- Affidavit of [a named person] requesting a death certificate for the above, dated [October] 2014; and
- Death certificate of the applicant’s mother, dated [October] 2014;
- Obituary notices regarding the applicant’s mother and husband and indication of burial service in relation to the applicant’s husband.
In the hearing the applicant showed the Tribunal two photographs of her mother’s burial by Muslim rites.
Independent information
DFAT Country Information Report – Nigeria, 9 March 2018 provides:
Cults Nigerian scholars returning from the United States in the 1950s introduced university or varsity cults, adapted from the US confraternity model. The first identified ‘confraternity’ or ‘cult’ was the Pyrates on the University of Ibadan campus in 1952. The group dressed up as pirates, protested elite, colonial culture, and promoted a pan Africanism. They soon expanded across new federal and state universities and split into new groups: the Buccaneers Confraternity, the Black Axe Movement, and the Family Confraternity.
DFAT understands several ‘cults’ now have a presence in high schools as well as the streets, operating more like gangs rather than religious cults. Young men in particular are targeted to join cults for protection and because of peer pressure. However, many young men and women voluntarily join – cult membership can mean access to money and power. Membership generally involves a violent initiation, which can include beatings and rape.[1]
…
[1] DFAT Country Information Report – Nigeria, 9 March 2018, paras 3.70-3.71
PREVALENCE OF FRAUD
Nigeria experiences high rates of document fraud. Most documents, from birth certificates to diplomas, can be falsified and procured. The Nigeria Police Force has established a Special Fraud Unit and the Penal Code and the Criminal Code address fraud and the falsification of documents. DFAT understands the Special Fraud Unit actively investigates and prosecutes suspects but very few cases have thus far resulted in convictions. The NIS has a forensic laboratory for the examination of travel documents and monetary instruments.
Many businesses provide false documents in Nigeria. DFAT understands it is neither difficult nor expensive to obtain a fraudulent driver’s licence or other documents that can be used to obtain a genuine passport (marriage certificate, birth certificate or age declaration, letter of identification from an individual’s local government etc.). Corruption at local NIS offices also enables the fraudulent production of genuine passports.[2]
[2] DFAT Country Information Report – Nigeria, 9 March 2018, paras 5.37-5.38
The applicant indicated in her written claims a ‘strong suspicion’ that the cult which has an intention to recruit and harm the applicant if she did not agree to recruitment was the Ogboni cult. The following information concerning this cult has been compiled from two former pieces of research undertaken by the then Refugee Review Tribunal and the Country of Origin Information Services Section of the Department of Home Affairs.[3]
Background to Ogboni cult
[3] RRT Research Response, Nigeria – NGA38592 – Ogboni – Forced Conversion – Location, 20 April 2011; Department of Home Affairs, Q&A Report, Nigeria:CI18042012183718 – Ogboni Society – State protection, 1 May 2018
Little is known about the Ogboni or their practices. Historically the Ogboni played an important role in the politics and affairs of the Yoruba peoples (present day Nigeria, Republic of Bénin and Togo)[4] but the nature of the group has changed and its significance diminished since the 19^th and 20^th centuries. Sources indicate that today the group considers itself more akin to a social club like the Masons than to a secret society or cult, and its adherents are usually influential and financially well off members of society including judges and politicians.
[4] Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (ACCORD), ‘Nigeria: 8th European Country of Origin Information Seminar Final Report Vienna, 28-29 June 2002’, Refworld website, 28 November, - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 1; Yoruba (undated), ‘Everyculture website, - Accessed 19 April 2011 – Attachment 2
The Ogboni cult in traditional Yoruba society was an instrument of government, and carried out legislative, executive and judicial functions and also functioned as a court of appeal.[5]
[5] The nature of reprimand in traditional Yoruba society, Akeem, OA, The Social Sciences, Vol 1, 4, p 244
Information on the Ogboni is provided in a research response by the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board dated 12 July 2005 which draws on the advice of a number of academics.[6] That response states the following on the subject of the group’s makeup and purpose:
With regard to how to describe the Ogboni, the political science professor said that members of the Ogboni "society" would likely take offence at having their organization referred to as a "cult" or a "secret society" and would probably refer to themselves as a "lodge" similar to that of the Masons (13 Apr. 2000). The anthropology professor said that in Nigeria the Ogboni are commonly referred to as a "secret society" by Nigerians, but that Ogboni members would likely self-identify the group as a social club whose members help each other in matters such as commerce, marriage, etc. (14 Apr. 2000). Consequently, in this Response the Ogboni will be referred to as a "society." The anthropology professor added that there has been a lot of "cross-fertilization" between the Masons and groups such as the Ogboni, since there are many Masons in Nigeria and that they have been there since the 19th century (ibid.).
Both scholars stated that Ogboni members are typically financially very well off and well-connected. The political science professor said that the current Ogboni society dates back to the 1930s when a group of senior Nigerian civil servants formed the society in reaction to the existing European social clubs that excluded native Nigerians (13 Apr. 2000). According to him, the Nigerians wanted a forum in which they could interact and enjoy some of the privileges of their senior status in Nigeria. The founder was a Methodist minister and, in addition to senior civil servants, Ogboni members included doctors, lawyers, senior police officials, and other elite Nigerians (ibid.). Both scholars stated that despite Ogboni origins in the Yoruba ethnic group, the membership includes persons of other Nigerian ethnicities. The anthropology associate professor stated that women are also now able to join (14 Apr. 2000)
[6] Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada 2005, ‘NGA100180.E – Nigeria: Ogboni society including history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; membership and consequences for refusing to join (April 2000-July 2005)’, Refworld website, 12 July - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 3
It also states:
The American-based scholars stated that they knew nothing of any Ogboni rituals, as its members are sworn to secrecy. Based on her knowledge of other similar groups, the anthropology professor said that initiation rituals would likely involve some mystical elements and "some sort of physical transformation" (14 Apr. 2000).
A report by the UK Home Office states the following on the subject of secret cults, juju or student confraternities in Nigeria:
Secret societies or cults exist in Nigeria but, by their nature, very little is known about them. The most widely reported and studied is the Ogboni cult, though many Ogboni members reportedly self-identify the group as a social club rather than a cult or a secret society.[7]
[7] Home Office UK Border Agency 2009, Operational Guidance Note Nigeria, 14th April - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 4
A 2002 report on Nigeria by the Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (ACCORD) indicates that the modern Ogboni is distinct from the traditional group of the same name. The report States:
The "Reformed" Ogboni Society" is an association of politicians and influential people, distinct from the traditional Ogboni society.
The traditional Ogboni society was part of the checks and balances system of the Yoruba kingdoms. They were kingmakers, and disposed of both a religious as well as a judicial function. They had also the power to dethrone the Oba (the king) and could order him to kill himself (or would give him poison). The ethnographic work on their role and function in the 19th and early 20th century dates back to the 1930s, thus no in-depth knowledge on their structure and inner workings after independence is available. They are thought to still dispose of considerable local influence, forming part of the traditional power network to regulate societies and control resources. It is assumed that through their membership they also have strong connections to official state structures (police, judiciary, commissions, universities).[8]
[8] Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (ACCORD), ‘Nigeria: 8th European Country of Origin Information Seminar Final Report Vienna, 28-29 June 2002’, Refworld website, 28 November, - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 1
A 2009 paper written by a lecturer in the Department of Religion at University of Ilorin refers to another writer’s depiction of Ogboni as connoting ‘maturity, discipline and truth’.[9] In addition, he also comments that:
…Okonko and Ogboni are organized in lodges, branches, and do have representative government with a hierarchy of elected officers and a special ritual for the election and initiation of new members. They are not societies of evil or darkness even though they carry a burden of secrecy. They are essentially ancestral organizations that emphasize good fellowship, coexistence, mutual aid and philanthropy. Many presidents, senators, governors and supreme court justices are members. By their very nature, Okonko and Ogboni tend to draw their members from the more privileged groups of citizens, in which the young are well provided with the advantages that lead them towards success. However, in recent times, the influence of Okonko in community affairs is diminishing. And Awolalu and Dopamu (2005:250) also observed that “the Ogboni society has lost much of its earlier powers… the Ogboni functions are limited to ceremonials like title taking, funerals, and sacrifices.”[10]
[9] ‘The theory and practice of secrecy in Ikonko and Ogbono Societies, Nwosu, P U, 2009, p. 11, CISE1310071958.
[10] Ibid.
Other sources also indicate that the society today resembles more of a social club, rather than a cult or secret society. Members are said to have links to Freemasonry, Rotary Club and the Rosicrucian Brotherhood, with strong representation within the social elite, including within the police, judiciary, government and traditional institutions.[11] Its influence is said to have been declining since the 1990s.[12]
[11] Nigeria: Ogboni society, including its history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; information on membership and the consequences of refusing to join NGA104213.E, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 14 November 2012 CIS 3899
[12] Country Focus Nigeria EASO, 2 June 2016, p. 57
Further, more specifically localised information states that Ogboni society may have an influence on traditional administration of the cities in the Egba, Egbado and Abeokuta parts of Nigeria, roughly corresponding to areas in Ogun State and Lagos State, along with some rural villages and towns on the borders of Ogun State with Oyu, Osun and Ondo States.[13]
Harm to relatives or those for intended initiation of Ogboni cult
[13] Nigeria: Ogboni society, including its history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; information on membership and the consequences of refusing to join NGA104213.E, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 14 November 2012 CIS 3899
By virtue of the relatively undocumented character of contemporary Ogboni Society practices,[14] a definitive answer was not found as to whether or not members who refused to join the Ogboni Society would be harmed. However, no sources were found of harm having been inflicted on a person who refused to join the Ogboni Society.
[14] Nigeria: Ogboni society, including its history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; information on membership and the consequences of refusing to join NGA104213.E, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 14 November 2012 CIS 3899
The Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board in 2005 stated the following on being forced to join the group:
the political science professor said that he was not aware of any recent examples of persons being forced to join (13 Apr. 2000)… On the other hand, the anthropology professor stated that forced membership in the Ogboni society might be possible, although it would not be common (14 Apr. 2000). She said that there was an expectation that children of members would join. If there was such an expectation, the parents could apply considerable pressure on the individual to join (ibid.).
The anthropology professor also described the only instance she could think of when the society might actively pursue a person who did not want to join (ibid.). If that person's parent(s) had "dedicated" their child to the society, sometimes before birth, then the society could go after the person and force him or her to join to ensure the fulfilment of the parents' promise. She said that the person who had been dedicated might be raised unaware that their parent(s) were Ogboni member(s). As such, they might not be approached by the society until they were thought ready to join, which could be when the individual was 30 or 40 years old. She added that she was fairly sure that the persons she lived with in Nigeria who were Ogboni did not join until they were in their late thirties.[15]
[15] Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada 2005, NGA100180.E – Nigeria: Ogboni society including history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; membership and consequences for refusing to join(April 2000-July 2005), Refworld website, 12 July, - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 3
The 2002 ACCORD report states that it is unlikely that an individual would be pressured to join the Ogboni, including through threats of physical harm, due to a family member’s position in the group:
It is also unlikely that there is a rule of automatic succession in a position (i.e. the son replacing the father) but more likely that those families who traditionally have had the authority to invite new members would choose the most suitable candidate. If this person should for some reason – because of his or her Christian belief – not want to join and if there is no other candidate from this particular family he or she might be ostracized and might also lose property or an inheritance but would not have to fear for his or her life.[16]
[16]Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (ACCORD), ‘Nigeria: 8th European Country of Origin Information Seminar Final Report Vienna, 28-29 June 2002’, Refworld website, 28 November, - Accessed 15 April 2011 – Attachment 1
A 2012 response by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada included comments by Prof Ama Mazama, a professor of African religion at Temple University, about the consequences for a person if they declined to join the society. He noted that positions within the Ogboni Society are not inherited:
[i]f one person's parent was a member of the Ogboni Society, and that person had been exposed to their activities (e.g. meetings held at his or her parents' house while the child was present so that over the years the child grew up knowing the identities of the Ogboni; or, the parent deliberately pledged that his or her child would become a member; or, if the child had been used as an assassin by the Ogboni in the sense that he or she had been the "courier" who went into a target's compound and added poison to the water source or whatever), that child would be expected to join). So, in essence only someone who has had a history with them in a very close manner can be intimidated into joining. And if this were in the Egba, Egbado or Abeokuta areas of Ogun State in particular (or within that region generally), their intimidation might work. Notwithstanding, the primary means of membership is voluntary. In most situations, individuals deliberately and voluntarily join these societies because they want power, financial rewards, and success.[17]
[17] Nigeria: Ogboni society, including its history, structure, rituals and ceremonies; information on membership and the consequences of refusing to join NGA104213.E, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 14 November 2012 CIS 3899
However, according to information in the 2017 EASO report on Nigeria, membership of the Ogboni is hereditary by the eldest son or daughter, who join voluntarily. As noted in the report:
In communities where chieftaincy titles are hereditary in some way, it is very unusual that refusing such a title poses a problem. First, it is unusual to refuse a title, because it implies refusing power, authority, prestige and respect (459), second, if someone would refuse, i.e. because of religious objections, there will generally be several others who are both qualified and willing to take the position (460).
According to interlocutors of the OFPRA fact-finding mission, membership of the Ogboni is hereditary by the eldest son or daughter, who join voluntarily, even Christians – although they mentioned that it is difficult to withdraw, that ‘it is normal, it is my destination (461).
No information was found in the available sources reporting verifiable cases of someone who has faced threats or violence after refusing the office of traditional ruler.[18]
[18] Country Focus Nigeria EASO, 2 June 2016, p. 61
Hearing, credibility, findings and assessment
The mere fact that a person claims fear of persecution for a particular reason does not establish either the genuineness of the asserted fear or that it is ‘well-founded’ or that it is for the reason claimed. It remains for the applicant to satisfy the Tribunal that all of the statutory elements are made out: MIEA v Guo & Anor (1997) 191 CLR 559 at 596. Although the concept of onus of proof is not appropriate to administrative inquiries and decision-making (Yao-Jing Li v MIMA (1997) 74 FCR 275 at 288), the relevant facts of the individual case will have to be supplied by the applicant himself or herself, in as much detail as is necessary to enable the examiner to establish the relevant facts. A decision-maker is not required to make the applicant’s case for him or her: Prasad v MIEA (1985) 6 FCR 155 at 169–70; Luu & Anor v Renevier (1989) 91 ALR 39 at 45. Nor is the Tribunal required to accept uncritically any and all the allegations made by an applicant: Randhawa v MILGEA (1994) 52 FCR 437.
In considering overall the credibility of the applicant the Tribunal is cognisant of the words of Beaumont J in Randhawa v MILGEA (1994) 52 FCR 437 at 451 in which he stated that ‘in the proof of refugeehood, a liberal attitude on the part of the decision-maker is called for… [but this should not lead to]… an uncritical acceptance of any and all allegations made by supplicants’. The Tribunal notes also the remarks of Gummow and Hayne JJ in Abebe v Commonwealth of Australia (1999) 197 CLR 510 at 191 where it was said that ‘the fact that an applicant for refugee status may yield to temptation to embroider an account of his or her history is hardly surprising’. The Tribunal has sought to adopt the liberal approach outlined in these cases.

The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a citizen of Nigeria and accordingly her claims will be assessed against Nigeria.
The Tribunal has the following numerous and significant credibility concerns with the applicant’s claims.
Firstly, the applicant’s claims of being intended for initiation in a cult whose practices and membership were highly secret was not consistent with evidence by the applicant that members of the cult attended the funeral of the applicant’s father dressed in ceremonial clothes.
In the hearing, the applicant confirmed that members of the cult arrived at the funeral dressed in their ceremonial clothes of the [cult]. The applicant indicated that there would have been [ a number of] individuals in attendance at the funeral in this attire. The applicant agreed that the cult was secret. Indeed, the applicant’s evidence is that she was not even told the name of the cult that she was being requested to join.
The Tribunal put to the applicant the inherent contradiction in her claims as to the secrecy of this cult with the fact [numerous] members of the cult would attend a funeral in a public place dressed in the ceremonial dress of the cult. In response, the applicant said that it is common practice in Nigeria that if a member dies then colleagues will pay homage in uniform.
The Tribunal is not persuaded of this explanation in relation to the likelihood of individuals in a claimed highly secret cult appearing in public in the ceremonial dress of the cult.
Secondly, it is not plausible that the applicant and her mother, particularly the mother, would have had no knowledge of the applicant’s father’s involvement in the cult. Even if the cult was secret the Tribunal considers there would have at least have been knowledge by the wife, the applicant’s mother, of spending time out of the house that was never explained.
As it is the applicant claimed there was no knowledge or suspicion. This is not plausible to the Tribunal.
Thirdly, it does not make sense that the applicant would be asked to join the cult without being told the name or key practices or purpose of the cult. In the hearing, the applicant said that she was told that she simply must accept that she should join the cult without being told its name or its core beliefs because they had showed her a photograph of her father in the cult.
The Tribunal does not accept that if there was a genuine intention that the applicant become a member of the cult that she would not have been given more information about the cult, including its name.
Fourthly, the applicant’s account of members of the cult seeking to harm her by following her to a wedding nine hours’ drive away from her home and shooting vehicles, including a vehicle of the applicant, was not credible or plausible to the Tribunal.
As put to the applicant in the hearing, it did not make sense that the perpetrators who intended to harm her would shoot at the vehicle of the applicant, but while the vehicle was parked outside a wedding reception, which the applicant was attending, with no one inside the vehicle. The Tribunal indicated that it would have been clear to the perpetrators that the applicant was not in the vehicle.
In response, the applicant indicated that it was near the end of the reception and people were leaving, implying that the perpetrators thought there were people in the car.
The Tribunal remains concerned as to the credibility of this claim. The Tribunal considers that it would likely be clear to individuals seeking to harm or kill the applicant as to whether she was physically present in her vehicle that was shot at.
The Tribunal also put to the applicant that it seemed significantly implausible that there would be such motivation for the applicant to join the sect that she would be followed to a location nine hours’ drive away from her home with multiple vehicles being shot at. The applicant in response said that this happened.
Whilst the Tribunal accepts that implausible events can occur the Tribunal remains having credibility concerns with the applicant’s account as to what happened at the wedding.
Fifthly, the applicant’s account as to what happened on the day of her claimed mother’s murder lacked credibility and plausibility, including in relation to the timing of various claimed events.
The applicant has claimed that at around the very time of her mother’s murder, which has been indicated as having occurred at 3:10pm, she was approached by a dark goggled stranger [where] she had been shopping and was told that what happened to her mother would happen to her.
In the hearing the applicant indicated that this caused her to call her mother’s younger brother who was in a shop close to where the applicant’s mother lived. This call resulted in the applicant’s uncle finding the body of her mother on the street about five houses from where the mother lived. The applicant told the Tribunal in the hearing that about five minutes after her call to her uncle, her uncle called her back to tell her what had happened to her mother. This resulted in the applicant getting a taxi to the location of her mother’s murder.
The applicant says that she attended the scene of the murder and her mother’s body was being put in a vehicle which was to be driven to the police station. The applicant indicated that she also attended the police station where she made a report. The police report that has been provided indicated that the applicant arrived at the police station at 3:30pm.
The applicant indicated in the hearing that her mother was buried shortly afterwards at 4pm.
The Tribunal considers that these claimed events defy credibility or plausibility in a number of respects.
The Tribunal considers that it defies plausibility that the plan to intimidate and harm the applicant because of her refusal to join the cult would have been so intricate and sophisticated that it would have involved the applicant’s mother being murdered and, simultaneously with the murder, the applicant having been tracked as she was shopping in public and being told and warned in relation to what had happened to her mother.
This concern was put to the applicant in the hearing and she maintained that the events did happen.
The Tribunal also considers that the timing of the claimed events is not possible. The Tribunal does not consider that in the space of 50 minutes from the time of the claimed murder at 3:10pm that the applicant could have travelled to the location of the murder from where she was shopping, travelled with the body back to the police station, made a detailed police report (see next issue) and buried her mother at around 4pm. The Tribunal also does not consider it plausible that authorities would have released the body so quickly in light of the mother being murdered.
When these concerns were put to the applicant in the hearing, she maintained that everything did happen as she has indicated.
The Tribunal does not accept this. The Tribunal maintains its credibility concerns identified in relation to this issue.
Sixthly, there are a number of credibility concerns with the police report provided by the applicant of her mother’s death.
Provided by the applicant to the Department is a police report from the [Police] Headquarters [dated] [May] 2014.
This indicates the applicant visiting the station at about 3:30pm reporting that her mother had been [killed] at around 3:10pm by unknown assailants. Her mother had been taking a stroll on the street.
The report indicates the applicant stating to police that just before she received the news of her mother’s death ‘she was accosted at the market by a dark goggled stranger, who threatened to deal with her in the manner her mother has been dealt with.’
The report indicates that on receipt of the report the station swung into action but all efforts so far to apprehend the murderers proved abortive. It states that nevertheless, the police will not relent in its efforts.
It is placed on the record in the report that the applicant had between March and April 2014 previously reported at the police station the case of alleged threats to her life and that of her mother by some alleged cult members.
The Tribunal has credibility concerns with this letter. The context of the letter, and its date do not make sense. The letter is written on the same date as the claimed murder of the applicant’s mother. Yet, the letter claims that police have ‘swung into action’ and made all efforts to apprehend the perpetrators but without success. It does not make sense that the letter would be making such a statement on the very day that the murder had been reported. It is not a statement that would be expected to have been made until sufficient time had passed to pursue investigations.
The tone and content of the letter do not otherwise appear genuine to the Tribunal. Its contents are highly self-serving to the applicant’s claims in terms of a report of the applicant being approached by ‘a dark goggled stranger’ and the indication of prior reports to the police station of threats by a cult. Again, the Tribunal would not expect a letter to have been constructed with this level of information and detail on the very day that the report of the murder was made.
The Tribunal put these concerns in relation to the police report to the applicant in the hearing. The applicant indicated in response that the report was genuine. She indicated that it was written while she remained at the police station [in] May 2014. It was needed to take to the hospital with her mother’s body.
This indication by the applicant simply reinforces the credibility concerns identified. It highlights that a genuine report would not have made reference to the police having conducted any investigations into the murder. The relative detail of the letter makes it unlikely that it would have been written while the applicant remained in the police station, particularly noting that she claims that her mother’s burial was at 4pm, not taking into account the fact that the body was yet to be taken to the hospital. The contents of the report, very self-serving to the applicant’s claims, go beyond a report that would be needed for the purpose of providing to the hospital that was to be receiving the body of the applicant’s mother.
In relation to this police report, the Tribunal put to the applicant in the hearing pursuant to the procedural requirements of s.424AA that the Tribunal had made a request of the DFAT Post in Nigeria to seek to ascertain the authenticity of this document. The Tribunal indicated that the response from Post was that neither of the phone numbers on the letter worked. Post indicated that they had one of the staff members visit police headquarters [and] no one was able to vouch for the authenticity of the letter. The Tribunal put to the applicant that this further undermined the authenticity of this report.
The Tribunal also discussed with the applicant the information in the DFAT report extracted in this decision as to the ready ability to obtain fraudulent documents in Nigeria.
In response to these matters the applicant maintained that the police report is authentic.
For all the reasons outlined, the Tribunal does not consider that the police report provided by the applicant is genuine. This not only undermines the credibility of the matters stated in the report but also the overall credibility of the applicant given her willingness to provide what the Tribunal considers is a clearly fraudulent document.
Seventhly, independent evidence does not support the existence of a cult in Nigeria that would take the extreme criminal actions that have been claimed by the applicant to have occurred in this case. All of the applicant’s claims considered in their entirety appear fanciful to the Tribunal.
The applicant has speculated that the cult in question could be the Ogboni cult, but she has not been specifically told this. The Tribunal has not found any independent information that would corroborate the existence of a cult that would engage in multiple murders in the event of an intended initiate not joining the cult.
The independent information contained in this decision concerning the Ogboni cult indicates that it operates more like a social/networking club like the Masons or Rotary. At most, the independent evidence suggests that there might be pressure of intended initiates to join the cult. There is no independent evidence that would confirm the very extreme actions that the applicant has claimed that the cult has engaged in to seek to ensure her joining of the cult – multiple murders and a shooting of vehicles. Independent information does indicate that children of members may be intended for initiation, particularly those who have engaged with the cult growing up. In this case however the applicant had no prior involvement in the cult, and indeed did not know that her father was a member of the cult.
The research in relation to cults set out in this decision and the Tribunal’s assessment above in relation to the Ogboni cult was put to the applicant in the hearing. In response, the applicant indicated that there are cults in Nigeria that will act in the extreme criminal ways that have occurred in this case.
The Tribunal is not satisfied that the weight of independent information before it supports this. The claims and criminality in this issue for the purpose of having an intended initiate join are extreme to say the least – two murders and travelling to a distant location and shooting multiple vehicles at a wedding. Whilst the Tribunal does accept that there is evidence that cults do engage in criminal activity the nature of the claimed criminality in this case goes significantly beyond what the independent information before the Tribunal would suggest.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Tribunal put to the applicant that the applicant’s claims considered as a whole appeared to the Tribunal as fanciful. In the context of the totality of the evidence and claims, what the applicant is alleging defies credibility or plausibility. It seems highly implausible that there would have been such an intense desire for the applicant to join this secret society, with which she had no prior knowledge or involvement, that two murders would be committed and a shootout.
In response, the applicant indicated that the events did in fact occur.
The Tribunal has great difficulty accepting the credibility of what has been claimed, including based on independent evidence concerning cults in Nigeria.
Eighthly the lack of knowledge indicated by the applicant in the hearing as to the whereabouts of her children or knowledge of further details of her husband’s death and any investigations into his death was not convincing or plausible to the Tribunal.
The applicant in the hearing indicated that the only account she received in Australia of the death of her husband was from the [employee] shortly after the death happened in early June 2014. After the murder the applicant was in contact with her [sibling] who went to her family home which had been shut up with everyone (her children and mother-in-law) gone. The applicant was otherwise vague about what her [sibling] did or told her.
The applicant indicated that the only other contact she had had with individuals in Nigeria (since arriving in Australia in 2014) was brief contact with the sister of her husband. The applicant was vague in the hearing as to contact with her sister-in-law. The applicant then said that her sister-in-law stopped contact with her. The applicant indicated that she has no further detail as to the death of her husband or whether it is being investigated by authorities in Nigeria.
The applicant indicates that her mother-in-law was to be involved with the caring of her two children [at] the point the applicant came to Australia. However, the applicant indicated in the hearing that she had lost her phone and contact details for her mother-in-law and therefore had been unable to contact her about the whereabouts or welfare of her children. The applicant indicated that she had not been able to make contact with anyone else in Nigeria in terms of finding out about her children.
As put to the applicant in the hearing, this evidence defied credibility. Even accepting that the applicant had lost her mobile phone the Tribunal is not persuaded that there would not be readily available means to contact family and friends in Nigeria since 2014 through email or social media to find out the whereabouts of her children and further details in relation to her husband’s death. In relation to the potential for email contact, the applicant indicated in the hearing that phone contact is preferred and that email is not readily checked.
The Tribunal is not satisfied with this explanation. The Tribunal considers that email would be a reasonable means for the applicant in the circumstances to have used to contact relevant individuals in Nigeria, particularly if other communication methods were not possible.
The evidence on this issue reinforces credibility concerns in relation to the applicant. The Tribunal considers that any reasonable mother would have done absolutely everything possible to find out as to the welfare and care of young children after the claimed death of their father, when the mother was far away in a foreign country. This is particularly the case given the applicant’s claims that the cult has killed close family members. Similarly, the Tribunal does not find it plausible that the applicant would not have obtained further details in Nigeria as to the circumstances of her husband’s claimed death and investigations into his murder.
The Tribunal considers cumulatively these eight credibility concerns. The cumulative impact of the concerns is seriously damaging to the applicant’s credibility. The Tribunal does not believe any of the applicant’s key substantive claims, with one exception. The claims are bordering on fanciful. The Tribunal does not consider the applicant has been a truthful and honest witness.
The Tribunal does not believe that members of a secret cult of which the applicant’s father had previously been a member approached the applicant after her father’s death requesting that she join the cult. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant refused to join the cult causing its members to seek to harm the applicant and her family. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant’s mother and husband were murdered by members of the cult for the reasons claimed. The Tribunal is not satisfied that a vehicle of the applicant was shot at at a wedding in the circumstances claimed. The Tribunal is not satisfied that there are cult members in Nigeria who have an adverse intention towards the applicant or her family. The Tribunal is not satisfied that there is a real chance of the applicant facing serious or significant harm for any of the reasons claimed.
The Tribunal does accept that the applicant’s mother was murdered [in] May [2014]. A hospital report of this incident dated [May] 2014 has been verified. However, the Tribunal does not accept that the murder was perpetrated by members of the cult who wished the applicant to join the cult. The Tribunal considers that the applicant has constructed her protection visa claims around the death of her mother that happened in other circumstances.
The Tribunal does not believe the authenticity of any of the other documents provided by the applicant in support of her claims which the Tribunal does not accept as credible for the many other reasons identified.
For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s.36(2)(a).
Having concluded that the applicant does not meet the refugee criterion in s.36(2)(a), the Tribunal has considered the alternative criterion in s.36(2)(aa). The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s.36(2)(aa).

100. There is no suggestion that the applicant satisfies s.36(2) on the basis of being a member of the same family unit as a person who satisfies s.36(2)(a) or (aa) and who holds a protection visa. Accordingly, the applicant does not satisfy the criteria in s.36(2).
DECISION
101. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.
David McCulloch
Member

[2019] AATA 6063

18 July 2019

Key Legal Topics

Areas of Law

Immigration

Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

Judicial Review

Natural Justice

Procedural Fairness

Statutory Construction

Jurisdiction