1616203 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Fiji, sought a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution in Fiji for reasons of political opinion or membership of a particular social group, or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that the applicant faced a real risk of significant harm upon removal to Fiji. The decision was made by Shane Lucas, a member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were twofold. Firstly, whether the applicant possessed a well-founded fear of persecution in Fiji based on one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J of the Migration Act 1958. Secondly, if the refugee criterion was not met, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Fiji, the applicant would suffer significant harm, as defined by section 36(2A) of the Act. The Tribunal was required to consider relevant policy guidelines and country information assessments.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa. It found that the applicant's claims of supporting breakaway states and associating with certain individuals did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for political opinion, nor did they constitute membership of a particular social group. The Tribunal also concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a real risk of suffering significant harm upon return to Fiji, noting that the claims of general brutality and over-militarisation were not sufficiently particularised to the applicant's individual circumstances, and that the applicant had not experienced harm or sought protection within Fiji. The applicant's stated reasons for leaving and fears of harm were considered vague and non-specific, and the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was motivated to achieve a migration outcome.