1612443 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of Fiji. The applicant claimed he feared arrest and questioning by the military upon return to Fiji due to his membership in the Pacific Indigenous Samaritan Association Inc (PISAI), an organisation seeking to establish Christian breakaway states in Fiji. He also claimed to be a Christian, an indigenous Fijian, and that his race would be subjected to ethnic cleansing. The delegate had rejected his claims, finding that he did not have an anti-government profile and that the human rights situation in Fiji had improved.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of a protection visa, specifically whether he had established a well-founded fear of persecution based on his membership in a particular social group, his race, or his political opinion. The court also considered the complementary protection criterion, which applies if there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, the applicant would face a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The court noted that the applicant had provided inconsistent information regarding his intentions for coming to Australia and his political activity. While the delegate accepted the applicant's support for the Fiji Native Government in Exile, they did not accept that he would be targeted due to his membership in PISAI or attendance at meetings. The delegate considered country information which indicated an improved human rights situation in Fiji and found that the applicant's claims of facing arrest and harm upon return were not substantiated. The delegate also noted reports confirming that an individual associated with the applicant's claimed activities had been banned from entering Fiji due to her involvement with the "so-called Christian state" movement. The delegate concluded that the applicant did not have an anti-government profile and was not at real risk of harm.