1616839 (Refugee)

[2019] AATA 6694

1616839 (Refugee) [2019] AATA 6694 (30 September 2019)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1616839

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   Pakistan

MEMBER:Anne Grant

DATE:30 September 2019

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant satisfies s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Statement made on 30 September 2019 at 11:57am

CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Pakistan – particular social group – persons who oppose the extremist ideology of the Pakistani Taliban – village Lashkar – Village Defence Committee – army operation – identification of Taliban sympathisers – education of girls – running of a co-educational school – general security situation – availability and delivery of mental health treatment – internal relocation – ineffective state protection – credible witness – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 36, 65, 91R
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2

CASES
MIMA v Respondents S152/2003 (2004) 222 CLR 1

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

1. 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).

2. The applicant, who claims to be a citizen of Pakistan, applied for the visa on 19 May 2014 and the delegate refused to grant the visa on 27 September 2016.

3. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 22 August 2019 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Pashto and English languages.

4. The applicant was represented in relation to the review by his registered migration agent. The representative attended the Tribunal hearing.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

5. 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.

6. 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).

7. 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.

8. 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’).

9. In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.84, made under s.499 of the Act, the Tribunal is required to take account of Refugee and humanitarian - Complementary Protection Guidelines and Refugee and humanitarian - Refugee Law Guidelines and any country information assessment prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.

10. The issue in this case is whether the applicant is a refugee and if not, whether there is a real risk that the applicant will suffer significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of him being removed to Pakistan.    For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

    Personal and migration history

11. The applicant’s identification documents disclose that he was born in SWAT, Pakistan.  In his application for protection, he states that he was born in [Village 1], Swat, Pakistan and is a Sunni Muslim, of Pashtun ethnicity.

12. He arrived in Australia [in] March 2014 on a student visa, at the age of [age] years.  He applied for protection on 15 May 2014.   At the time of his application for protection, the applicant’s parents were still living in Swat, Pakistan.  He has six brothers and one sister.  The applicant is the youngest of 8 children, with [number of] years between him and the next oldest son, [Brother A].  All of the applicants’ brothers and his sister are married. The applicant is single.

    The applicant’s written claims and supporting documents.

13. In a statement lodged with his application for protection, the applicant made the following claims about his personal history and experiences in Pakistan:

    ·After completing his [qualification], he started teaching at [School 1], a school owned by his family, in 2013.

    ·He fears the Taliban because they will kill or mistreat him due to his family involvement in the Village Defence Committee (VDC) and in [education].    The school was opened in [year] and his brother [Brother B] and other family members are strong supporters of the VDC.

    ·The Taliban, via Mawlana Fazlullah started their activities in SWAT in about 2007.  They targeted police, army personnel, people with anti-Taliban political views, those engaged in female education and employment and those who disobey their orders. 

    ·The school was providing co-education in the village. In about 2008, a group of Taliban came to his brother [Brother B] and asked him to close the school, but he refused.    They then warned him that he will be mistreated along with his family members by the Taliban. 

    ·A few weeks later, a group came to the house.  When they found [Brother B] not there, they took the applicant.  At this time the applicant was [age] years old.    He was beaten on the way to their compound.    His brother went to the Taliban and paid 200,000 rupees after about 6 days (the time was needed for his brother to raise that money).  The applicant was tortured physically and mentally.  The Taliban told his brother to close his school or he will be treated the way they treated the applicant.

    ·His brother was worried about his student’s wellbeing from the Taliban. They came back in late 2008, but [Brother B] refused to shut the school.  He was beaten in front of his staff and threatened with death.  He ignored this threat and the school stayed open.  In Mid November 2008, the Taliban fired on the school in the afternoon.  His cousin’s son [Relative C] was killed.   The school was partially destroyed and remained closed for a while after the attack.  His brother [Brother A] left the country after this as he was very afraid.

    ·His brothers, cousins and friends organised a meeting to discuss Taliban issues and find a solution.  They formed a village Lashkar.  They couldn’t do this openly but worked against the Taliban whenever they could.  Fazlullah announced the names of the applicant’s brother, cousins and their friends and asked his followers to kill them. After that, they took extra precautions wherever they went.  They also performed a night watch.

    ·Finally an army operation began in April 2009.  They claimed victory against the Taliban in about August 2009.   Residents were asked to leave to go to displaced person camps in the meantime but then were asked to come back to their homes. When they went back, their house had been damaged and robbed.  His brothers, his cousin [Cousin D] and their friends offered to help with restoration.  A Village Defence committee was formed. [Cousin D] became president of the committee.

    ·The applicant, his brothers, cousins and friends distributed rations amongst the needy.  They attended army meetings and performed night watches.    He went with his brother to report homes of Taliban members, (which were later destroyed by the army,) and also his brother assisted with a Taliban list for the village.  Many people who were shown to the army by his brothers and friends were captured; and some killed by the army. 

    ·After a meeting against the Taliban, his brother and cousin were attacked.  His cousin [Cousin D] and another member of the committee, [Mr E] were killed.   His brother continued their work.  With the help of the Army they reopened the girls section of the school.  The applicant provided night watches with his older brothers.  The Taliban had been dispersed but continued their targeted attacks.

    ·Many members of the VDC have been targeted.  Another of his cousins [Cousin F] was threatened and left SWAT and went to Karachi to save his life.  However he was traced by Taliban in Karachi and killed [in] June 2012.   

    ·On 11 July 2013, [Brother B] received a call from Taliban, threatening him to withdraw support for VDC and English education.  They told him they will start with the youngest and kill them one by one. 

    ·On 27 July 2013 when he was returning home from a playground, a van stopped in front of him.   He was scared and ran away.  They fired two shots towards him but he escaped unharmed.  After this, he would only go to school or stay at home as he was very afraid.  His mother asked him to leave the country.  He applied for a visa to Australia. 

    ·He is afraid that the Taliban will kill or mistreat him if he returns to Pakistan.

    ·The authorities in Pakistan cannot provide protection as they are targeted by the Taliban on a daily basis.

14. The applicant also provided an additional statutory declaration in which he reiterated his claims and gave more information about his experiences in Pakistan.  In summary, that statement included the following claims:

    ·He describes no or low education prospects for girls in the Swat and their home area.  [School 1] was established in [year].  The school was self-funding after a while. His brother [Brother G] established the school and described it as a social enterprise as well as an opportunity to run a successful business.  In the beginning it was just a small [building].  The school now teaches up to year [number].

    ·[Brother G] migrated to [Country 1] in 2005.  From that time, [Brother B] took the responsibility for the school and faced direct threats as a result.  The applicant’s father was a [Occupation 1] and had experience outside of Pakistan and did not agree with Fazlullah’s teachings. His father always told the applicant Fazlullah was not a good man.  

    ·Fazlullah started issuing directions against girl’s education.  He claimed that girls should not attend school or even leave the home.  As a consequence, enrolments dropped.  However, some girls still came and it was the view of his brothers and father that so long as they came, they would continue to teach them. 

    ·In 2008, 5 of Fazlullah’s followers came and threatened [Brother B].  At that time they were issuing such threats against all schools.  Perhaps because of that, his brothers and father didn’t take the threats seriously. [Brother B] didn’t close the school.  He had several employees who were anxious to continue work.

    ·It was some weeks after that, when Fazlullah’s followers came to their home.  The applicant was playing cricket in the courtyard with his nephew.  The bell rang.  His parents were home but none of the brothers.  5 of Fazlullah’s followers were at the door.  The applicant recognised [Mr H], a man from their area and who was said to have become one of Fazlullah’s important commanders.  When they couldn’t find [Brother B], they took the applicant.  When the car stopped, eventually, he was taken out, still blindfolded and dragged into a nearby building.  He was alone in a room and could hear talking and voices outside in the building.

    ·One man came after about an hour and said the applicant should come with them onto the right path; the path of religion.  Since the applicant was a young man, they said if he joined their organisation, he would ‘find the way to paradise.’  The applicant  knew what they wanted.  They were using people his age as suicide bombers.  He did not respond.  When they suggested his brother was on the wrong path, he protested and was slapped.  After that they came every hour and a half and beat him.  The beatings were most frequent on the first day and less after that.  He was punched and kicked.  He was hit with sticks and also lashed with a whip.  They were given small amounts of food twice a day.  On the sixth day they blindfolded him and took him to the Green Palace, Fazlullah’s headquarters.  [Brother B] was there.  On the way home, the applicant fainted.  When he regained consciousness, [Brother B] was carrying him. 

    ·To ensure his release, [Brother B] had agreed to close the school and also paid 200,000 rupees.  The applicant couldn’t leave the home for around one month after that.  He was in a state of fear.  After that month, his father encouraged him to have some courage.  He caught the school bus and then came straight home.   

    ·From late 2008, there were military operations.  During this time, [Brother B] could only operate the school from time to time.  He was stubborn and they were all used to living with danger.   He thought they had taken enough precautions to make sure they were safe.  In late 2008 the Taliban came again and beat [Brother B], threatening to kill him.  Then, in November 2008, the school building was fired upon and partially destroyed. 

    ·The attack killed one student, [Relative C], the applicant’s cousin’s son.  Some other students were badly injured and had to be hospitalised.  One little girl was injured and her name was [Ms I].  She kept coming to school in a wheelchair, saying if the Taliban wanted her to stop, it had to kill her.  His brother was inspired by the students, and made a commitment that, as long as they were keen to study, he would keep the school open.

    ·After the school was attacked, [Brother A] travelled to [Country 1] out of fear.

    ·From 2008, the army had a presence in the area but was ineffective to stop attacks.  His brothers, cousins and others in the village established a village Lashkar to monitor and resist the Taliban in the area.     [Brother B] took the lead, and wherever he went the applicant would go with him.  Also involved were one of his cousins, [Cousin D] and a second cousin [Cousin J].    His brothers [Brother K] and [Brother L] were not interested in participating.  [Brother L] was older and married and engrossed in his religious learnings.  [Brother K] was married with his own kids. 

    ·The applicant describes in detail the establishment of the Lashkar. They went door to door to find people to support the Lashkar.  [Brother B] explained that Fazlullah would just grow stronger unless he was stopped.  Most agreed but almost none offered to volunteer for night patrols.  The applicant would go on patrol with [Brother B] and carried a pistol.    It was not a big thing at that time for young boys to be exposed to violence or to carry arms.  They were living in the middle of a huge conflict. 

    ·After only a couple of months, they were listening to Fazlullah’s station to keep up to date with his strategies.  The applicant heard his brother’s name and also that of [Cousin D] and [Cousin J].  Fazlullah said that these people were spreading propaganda against him and doing work to undermine the religion.  They were liable for death.  It was terrifying to hear his brother’s name in that way.    That night they stood watch and others did at the homes of the other men.

    ·In April 2009, the army told everyone to evacuate.  [Cousin D] wanted to stay and help the army.  [Brother B] and his father would have also stayed, but their mother was ill and they needed to have access to medical treatment.  The family left and travelled to Mingora, then Swabi.  After two months, they got a call from [Cousin D] who said that [Village 1] had been cleared and they could return to [Village 2], nearby.  They went to [Village 2] for about a month. 

    ·When they returned to [Village 1], it was heavily militarised.  [Cousin D] had negotiated  the safe transfer of the area to the army to avoid armed conflict by ensuring that Fazlullah’s followers left.  The army could not guarantee their safety and recommended the establishments of Lashkars called Village Defence or Peace Committees.  In [Village 1] it was a Village Defence Committee (VDC.)  [Cousin D] became the president, and [Brother B] coordinated the committee’s activities in [Locality 1]. 

    ·The committee coordinated night patrols, the identification of people in the neighbourhood and the registration of new people and also to identify people of interest to the Army.    This time, the army ordered everyone to provide at least one male member from every household.  The applicant and [Brother B] went house to house recording names.  The applicant then drew up the roster setting out who would perform patrol.  A copy was then pasted on guest house wall. 

    ·The VDC played an important liaison role because the army didn’t even speak the local language.  The VDC coordinated rations and became the public face of the army amongst the local people.  They were also required to report people known to be working with Fazlullah. 

    ·The applicant identified two young boys (named) who had made statements in favour of Fazlullah and tried to win other young boys to fight the cause.    Eventually, they had stopped coming to school and there was rumours they had gone to fight with Fazlullah.  They reported them to the Army.  The army later cordoned off the area where the boys houses were, and destroyed them.

    ·In 2011, they were calling for more names.  The applicant identified three more men (whom he named in his declaration) a few years older than him.  They boasted about being informers to the Taliban.   Their homes were also raided and later destroyed by the Army.

    ·The army encouraged [Brother B] to reopen the school.  They said it was only through education that they would prevent the spread of ignorance and re-emergence of the Taliban.  He reopened the school and ran it until 2013. 

    ·In April 2010, [Brother B] and other VDC members were attacked.  The applicant’s cousin [Cousin D] was killed.  [Brother B] and others rolled into a gutter to protect themselves.  Another VDC member, [Mr M], was also killed. 

    ·In Mid 2012, [Cousin F] told the applicant that he had received a threat.  He left for Karachi soon afterwards.  There is a large Pashtun community in Karachi and many from Swat.    On 15 June 2012, [Cousin F] was killed in Karachi.  His body was brought back to [Village 1] for burial.

    ·Despite these atrocities, [Brother B] continued as a leader. 

    ·On 11 July 2013, [Brother B] received a call to his telephone at school.  “Because of you people, our houses have been destroyed, our people have been captured.  We are going to destroy your family from the roots upwards, starting with the youngest one.”  He then hung up the call.    The applicant did not think that his brother took the call particularly seriously at the time. 

    ·On 27 July 2013, the applicant had been playing football in the playground.  It was Ramadan and he was heading home to breakfast.  A van began to drive towards him.  He saw that the driver and passenger both had their faces covered.  He ducked into the first house with an open gate and ran in.  He heard two shots.  He fell immediately to the ground and went numb. 

    ·[Brother B] was not at home when he got there, because another relative, [Relative N] had been killed on the same day.  [Relative N] was also the head of a VDC.

    ·After this attack, his family made all the arrangements to get him out of the country.  His brother ceased his involvement in the school.  He passed responsibility to [Mr O]. 

    ·On 27 June 2016, the applicant’s cousin [Cousin J], and his brothers [Brother B] and [Brother K] were attacked.  One of the attackers was shot in the foot.  These people weren’t recognised when they came to the area, didn’t look like Taliban, and the three men went to check them out.  They believe that these attackers came to kill them as senior members of the peace committee.  They want revenge because the peace committee informed on them. 

    ·[Brother B] now looks after his parents as carer. 

1. With his application for protection, the applicant provided the following documents in support:

   ·Family Registration Certificate, passport and his Identity card.

   ·[Counselling and Psychology] report 23 May 2016.  The counsellor reports that the applicant presented with severe anxiety and depressive symptoms. He described symptoms of sweating, rapid heartbeat, hyperventilating, difficulty to concentrate, shaking and constant headaches most days. He is reported as experiencing low mood, anhedonia, no appetite, and sleeping issues.   The applicant described being constantly fearful for his family in Pakistan and also for himself if he returns.  As a result of this, he had difficulty concentrating and holding a job. He had disclosed suicidal thoughts. 

   ·Foundation House Report from [Ms P], Counsellor dated 19 May 2016.  This report confirms the applicant was referred by [mental health service provider] in September 2015 because his counsellor assessed that he urgently needed ongoing treatment for symptoms of severe anxiety and depression due to traumatic events experienced in Pakistan.  This report includes the following information:  “Whilst eager to engage in counselling to improve his symptoms, his capacity  to process the content of his traumatic experiences has been severely restricted.  This has been due to the severity of his intrusive symptoms which result in him becoming greatly distressed in sessions when speaking of his past experiences.    When [the applicant] begins to speak about certain aspects of his trauma history particularly his experience of being kidnapped and detained by the Taliban, he displays marked physiological reactions including fine motor shaking in his hands and legs, and has difficulty breathing.”  He also experiences episodes of dissociation.  When extremely distressed the applicant is reported to have cancelled sessions to avoid discussing the events he has experienced.  The counsellor states that he displays depressive symptoms including low affect and energy levels and has expressed suicidal ideation - and presents with persistent, negative trauma-related emotions, including fear and horror, and a diminished interest in significant activities such as study, work and social activities.  According to the report, the stressors of his refugee status determination process have severely impacted on his ability to manage his trauma related symptoms and have compounded his presentation of depression and post-traumatic-stress-related symptoms.  Given his current functioning, young age and stage in development, and ongoing symptoms, it is critical that [the applicant] continue to receive specialist torture and trauma counselling to prevent further deterioration.  It is also critical that he continue to be treated by a psychiatrist who can monitor his psychotropic medication and provide ongoing assessment and treatment.

   ·Village defence committee:  card [number]

   ·A letter from Qumi Aman Committee, [Village 1] dated 15 May 2016.  This letter certifies that [Brother B] is a permanent resident of [Village 1] Swat.  He and his family especially his brother [the applicant] pro-army and pro-government person    during the time of militancy and operation against the Taliban in Swat he and his brother helped the army and the government in identification of Taliban and shows hideout of militants.  Due to which he and his whole family is now in the target list of Taliban.  [Brother B] is an active member of Village Defence Committee [Village 1] Swat. 

   ·Qomi Aman Committee card.  

   ·[Country 1] Resident Identity Card for [Brother G] and a copy of his passport also.    

   ·[Company 1] employee card for [Brother G], [Occupation 2]. 

   ·News report [June], 2012 referring to several attacks in Karachi, including [Cousin F] son of [Relative Q] who was originally from Swat only a couple of months earlier, and [an] English News report confirming that [Cousin F] was shot dead by killers in Karachi.  [June], 2012.

   ·[Occupation 1] Identity Document for [Brother R], issued [in] 2014 plus his passport and [personal record],

2. Prior to the tribunal hearing, the applicant provided the following additional documents in support of his claims:

   ·Multiple photographs of [School 1] including children and teachers in and outside building and clearly of differing events.    

   ·Local Newspaper extract from 2017. 

   ·Statutory Declarations about family relationship of the applicant to the VDC member who was killed ([Cousin D]) and to [Cousin F] who was killed in Karachi.

   ·Records of school attendance and fees and teacher timesheets.  

   ·Confidential psychological report dated 1 August 2018 by [Ms S].

   ·Report by Psychiatrist [Dr T] 9 May 2018.  In this report he notes that he told the psychiatrist that he has witnessed Taliban killing people in front of him and has witnessed several dead bodies.

   ·Medical Reports showing various illnesses for parents. 

   ·The Nation Newspaper report [Dec] 2013 re [members] of Swat Defence Committees killed in 2013, including [Relative N].

   ·Record of [work] for [Brother R] and ID card.

3. At hearing, the applicant gave detailed evidence consistent with the information in his statutory declarations and also provided clarification and additional information when requested to do so.  He provided new information in response to questions about various circumstances described in his statements above, and about some of the matters raised in his written claims and in the documents he had provided as follows:

   ·In relation to the school records and photographs, he asked [Brother B] for whatever information he could get and these were what he sent to him.  He could not explain why names on different documents were highlighted on some pages.  His representative said that they faithfully highlighted the same documents as in the original material sent to them.   The highlighted names have nothing to do with the applicant’s case.

   ·The applicant also clarified that his brother [Brother K] was not included in the family certificate because his identity card had lapsed.

   ·I asked the applicant to clarify the names of his siblings and their children for me.  (The applicant endeavoured to spell the following names for me but they may be incorrect due to my own transcription.)  He gave evidence that his brother [Brother B] is married to [Ms U], with two sons, [Child V] and [Child W].  His [Brother R] is married to [Ms X] with children [Child Y] and [Child Z].  [Brother K] is married to [Ms AA] with no biological children but has adopted [Child AB] and [Child AC].  [Brother G] is married to [Ms AD] and has [Child AE] and [Child AF].  [Brother L] is married to [Ms AG] with a child [Child AH].  [Brother A] is married to [Ms AI], and he has one son [Child AJ] and [Sister AK] is married to [Mr AL] with two children, [Child AM] and [Child AN].

   ·After the applicant had named his nieces and nephews, I noted that some of these children’s names are recorded as ‘free’ students in the fee list of the school.  The applicant confirmed that his siblings did not pay the school fees, because of course they were part of the family who owned and ran the school.  [Brother B]’s child [Child W] can be seen as a “free” student,  as can the applicant’s nephews or nieces named [Child AF] and [Child AE] ([Brother G]), [Child AB] and [Child AC] ([Brother K]), [Child AM] and [Child AN] ([Sister AK]), and [Child Z] ([Brother R]) The applicant confirmed that [Mr AO] is a different person than [Brother B], his brother.  He also confirmed that there are many [people who share his surname] in his home village and not all of them are related to the applicant.

   ·The applicant gave detailed evidence about the rise of Fazlullah in Swat and his extremist ideology and dogmatic and fanatical leadership.  He noted that he ran radio shows in which he expounded his beliefs, and vilified anyone opposed to them, often naming people he felt had injured Islam or gone against Fazlullah and his ideals.  Swat was a stronghold of the Pakistani Taliban over many years.    His father repeatedly talked to him and his brothers about how he disagreed with Fazlullah, particularly over his stance on education of children and girls in particular.  His family did not agree with Fazlullah’s extremist views. 

   ·The applicant became distressed when talking about his abduction and confirmed that he had recognised one of the men as a local Taliban supporter, but did not know the others.  He said that the matter was not reported to police because there would be no purpose in doing so.  At that time (around 2008), there was no police or army in the region.  The Taliban was in effective control.  It wasn’t until 2009 that the army were able to make serious inroads into Swat. 

   ·In relation to the incident where he was shot at, the applicant described walking home after playing football when he became alarmed by a car following him.  When he saw that the people in the car wore scarves to disguise themselves, he panicked and ran into the nearest house.  The house was luckily open – though it is considered very rude to enter someone’s home unwelcomed - but he was young and desperate and he just ran into the first home he came to.  This was very close (only a few houses) from his home.  He knew the people but still, his running into their home could have put them in danger. 

   ·The applicant had provided a number of photographs depicting the [School 1], students, teachers and presentations.  I asked the applicant to look through them and point out any of his family or cousins in the photos.  He only found one photo of [Brother L] and one of [Cousin D] which he tagged for me.  The others were taken by [Brother B] over many years of the children and teachers at the school. 

   ·The applicant had provided a newspaper clipping in a local language.  I asked if he could tell me what it related to and after looking at it for some time, the applicant could not say what its’ relevance was, or why [Brother B] had sent it to him. 

   ·I noted that the delegate had found that the applicant had a friend named [Alias F] on his [social media] page.  He concluded that the [Cousin F] who was killed in Karachi in 2012 was unrelated to the applicant.   The applicant was asked about this.  He said it was true he has a [social media] friend called [Alias F].  That man is in Melbourne.  That man is a different person but with the same name as his cousin who was killed in Karachi.    The applicant became distressed when talking about his cousin being shot in the head when he had gone to Karachi to escape the threat of violence from the Taliban in Swat. 

   ·The applicant explained that he didn’t speak to many of his siblings often, but did regularly speak to [Brother B] and to his mother (until recently).  His siblings who remain in Pakistan are generally spread around the region but not in [Village 1] itself.

   ·I noted that the medical report provided by the applicant referred to him having said that he had seen the Taliban killing people in front of him, but he had not included that in his claims.  The applicant became distressed and animated, saying that yes, it happened in 2007 when he was still young (he was [age] years old).  At this time, the Taliban was in full control of the area.  One of them beheaded a police officer in the centre of the village and then abused the poor man’s head, slapping it repeatedly and warning that this is how their (the Taliban’s) opponents will be treated.  They would also lash people who didn’t go to mosque when required.  The applicant exhibited distress in retelling this story consistent with the description of his reaction to outlining experiences of trauma described in the psychiatric/psychological reports.

   ·The applicant said that he could not relocate outside of Swat as he has no relatives or people who he can rely on outside of the area.  He fears that he would be known by extremists once they became aware of his background from [Village 1] - but he wouldn’t know who they were in any other part of Pakistan.  He fears for his life throughout Pakistan. 

   ·The applicant confirmed that he receives ongoing mental health treatment.  He said that he has found the loss of his mother who died recently to be stressful and was visibly distressed as he described how much he missed his family and how he was lonely and isolated in Australia, but said that at least here, he was not afraid of being killed or tortured.  He stated that he would not be here unless his life was genuinely in real danger in Pakistan.

   Country Information

4. In considering whether the applicant’s fear of persecution is well founded, I have also considered the available country information.  In its’ most recent Country Information Report, Pakistan (20 February 2019) DFAT includes the following assessment:

   SECURITY SITUATION

   2.66    The security situation in Pakistan is complex, volatile, and affected by domestic politics, politically motivated violence, ethnic conflicts, sectarian violence, and international disputes with India and Afghanistan. According to the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP), 3684 civilians have died in terrorism-related violence between 2014 and mid-January 2019. SATP bases its statistics from media reports, so this number may understate the actual number of casualties.

   2.67    Overall, there was a 29 per cent decline in the number of reported terrorist attacks in 2018 (compared to a 16 per cent decline in 2017), marking a nine-year downward trend. Nevertheless, Pakistan continues to face security threats from insurgent, separatist and sectarian militant groups.

   2.68    Up to 262 reported terrorist attacks, including 19 suicide and gun-and-suicide coordinated attacks, killing 595 and injuring 1030, occurred in 2018 (compared to up to 370 reported attacks in 2017). The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), TTP splinter groups, and ISIL-affiliates conducted up to 171 of these attacks (compared to up to 213 attacks in 2017). Nationalist groups also carried out up to 80 attacks, killing 96 and injuring 216, in 2018 (compared to 138 in 2017), and there were up to 11 sectarian related terrorist attacks, killing 50 and injuring 45 (compared to 20 in 2017). Moreover, while there was a 21 per cent decrease in suicide attacks in 2018 (compared to 2017), the number of people killed by suicide attacks in 2018 actually increased by 11 per cent (from 286 in 2017, to 317 in 2018).

   2.69    The security situation varies across the country, however, and militant attacks can occur anywhere. Balochistan faced the most significant security challenges in 2018, due to activity by both religious and nationalist non-state actors. While Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, including the former FATA, reported the highest number of terrorist attacks (125 attacks, killing 196), Balochistan reported the second highest number of attacks (115), but claimed the highest death toll (354). Sindh ranked third (12 attacks, killing 19), Gilgit-Baltistan fourth (5 attacks, killing 5), Punjab ranked fifth (4 attacks, killing 20), and Azad Jammu and Kashmir ranked last (1 attack, killing 2). The highest decrease in attacks (compared to 2017) was reported in Punjab (71 per cent decrease), followed by AJK (67 percent), Karachi (62 percent), Sindh excluding Karachi (57 percent), Balochistan (30 per cent), and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (by 19 percent).

   2.70    Security and law enforcement personnel were the target of the largest number of attacks during 2018 (136 attacks, or 52 per cent, killing 217), however the most lethal attacks were against political leaders and workers (24 attacks, killing 218). Politicians remain at risk of assassination. 47 attacks (killing 51) targeted civilians, seven targeted Shi’a, two targeted Christians, one targeted Hindus, one targeted Sikhs, and six targeted educational institutions (see Religion and Education). Moreover, four terrorist attacks (killing 8) targeted religious minorities in 2018 (compared to six in 2017), and up to six incidents of faith-based, individual or communal violence (killing 4) were also reported (compared to 5 in 2017). Three of the faith-based violent incidents targeted the Ahmadi community (see Religion and Ahmadis). Sectarian violence also reduced by 40 per cent (12 incidents reported) in 2018 compared to 2017.

   2.71    Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS or Daesh) increased its activity in Pakistan in 2017 and 2018, especially in Balochistan and northern Sindh (see ISIL, Anti-Pakistan Sunni groups and anti-Shia sectarian groups). While ISIL was responsible for attacks with the largest death tolls, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP, or the Pakistani Taliban) and associated groups conducted the largest number of attacks in both 2017 and 2018 (see Anti-Pakistan Sunni groups and anti-Shia sectarian groups).

   2.72    The underlying conditions for militancy, including weak executive, judiciary and law enforcement institutions, poor infrastructure and services, extreme religious ideologies and stark sectarian divisions, and lack of economic opportunity continued in 2018, and continue to do so in 2019. DFAT assesses cycles of violence are likely to continue until these conditions change. The state's use of Islam to foster Pakistan's national identity complicates counter-radicalisation efforts and undermines the status of non-Muslim groups in the country.

5. I am satisfied that the country information reflects that whilst a reduction in extremist attacks has been achieved due to various government anti-terror initiatives throughout Pakistan over recent years, the country is still subject to unpredictable attacks on government, civilian, sectarian and military targets.  The general security situation continues to be unstable as various extremist groups vie for stronger footholds in larger urban areas, and those extremist groups have proven continuously capable of targeted and large scale attacks against government, political and sectarian targets.  In this security context, I consider that the country information suggests that the risk or chance of being targeted to persons who have an elevated community profile of the types targeted by extremist groups (or a combination thereof) is reasonably considered to be greater than a remote risk or chance of harm in any part of the country where extremists are active or have any presence.  This includes people who have a military, policing or political profile, high profile Shia clerics or Shia community leaders.

6. In relation to Mental Health treatment in Pakistan, country information provides a bleak picture of both the availability of resources and the delivery of those resources throughout the country to vulnerable Pakistanis.  I note the following in the UK Home  Office’s country Policy and Information Note Pakistan:  Medical and healthcare issues[1]:

   [1] UK Home Office, 1 August 2018.

   13 Mental Health

   13.1.1 The WHO ‘Mental Health Atlas 2014’ stated that there were 5 mental hospitals in Pakistan with 344 residential care facilities, and in general hospitals, there were 654 psychiatric units. The number of mental health beds was 2.1 per 100,000 of the population. The total number of mentally ill inpatients was 104,059.

   13.1.2 In a response to a questionnaire cited in the Belgian Desk on Accessibility’s Country Fact Sheet on Pakistan of June 2015, a local contact observed that: ‘… there are no truly specialized institutions for the treatment of mental disorders. Psychiatrists and psychologists can be contacted in tertiary care and in private healthcare. Medication can be bought easily… psychiatric patients are discriminated but [there is no…] further explanation [of how].’

   13.1.3 A BBC News report, ‘Why Pakistan's poor seek mental health cure at shrine,’ dated 29 September 2016, stated:

   ‘More than 15 million people in Pakistan suffer from some form of mental illness, according to the latest estimate by the Pakistan Mental Health Association.

   ‘But there are only five government-run psychiatric hospitals for a population of 180 million. And there are fewer than 300 qualified psychiatrists practising in Pakistan.’

   13.1.4 A 2015 International Journal of Emergency Mental Health and Human Resilience article, ‘Mental Health Pakistan:  Optimizing Brains’, stated:

   ‘Mental health is the most neglected field in Pakistan where 10-16% of the population, more than 14 million, suffers from mild to moderate psychiatric illness, majority of which are women.

   ‘Pakistan has only one psychiatrist for every 10,000 persons suffering from any of the mental disorders, while one child psychiatrist for four million children, who are estimated to be suffering from mental health issues. Only four major psychiatric hospitals exist for the population of 180 million and it is one [of] the major factors behind increase in number of patients with mental disorders…

   ‘In Pakistan, [the] majority of the psychiatric patients go to traditional faith healers and religious healers who believe that mental illness is caused by supernatural forces such as spirit possession or testing by God…

   ‘There is also no political will and no proper mental health policy in Pakistan. All this adversely affects the integration of care delivered by government health care professionals for patients with mental illnesses. Major mental disorders in Pakistan are depression (6%), schizophrenia (1.5%) and epilepsy (1-2%)…

   ‘Mental disorders are among the risk factors for communicable and non-communicable diseases. They can also contribute to unintentional and intentional injury. At the same time, many health conditions increase the risk for mental disorder for example obesity has been associated with significant increase in depression. Stigma about mental disorders and discrimination against patients and families prevent people from seeking mental health care.

   ‘Pakistan, among the other developing countries, has a higher prevalence rate of depression because of the current social adversities...

   ‘Lahore has the highest number of depressives that is 53.4% as compared to Quetta (43.9%) and Karachi (35.7%). The current situation in Pakistan along with other basic health problems, the social upheaval, political instabilities, lawlessness, terrorism, economic disparity, problems with security, safety, gas and electric load shedding, escalating prices of petrol, gas, and other basic necessities of life has created a ground fertile for depression which has almost taken the first position among all the psychiatric conditions.’

   13.1.5 MedCOI reported the following anti-depressant drugs to be available: Amitriptyline, citalopram, duloxetine, trazodone32, sertraline, venlafaxine, mianserin, mirtazapine.

1. DFAT reports in relation to State Protection as follows:

   5.1  Pakistan’s formal legal framework provides for state protection of people’s property, lives, places of worship and religious beliefs. However, DFAT assesses that state protection in Pakistan is limited due to resource shortages, corruption, socio-economic factors at the individual level, and political will.

   5.2  Despite measures introduced to curb violence across the country under the NAP—strengthened powers for military and paramilitary security forces and the establishment of military courts—successful prosecution for politically motivated or sectarian violence is rare. This is due in part to ineffective police investigations, forensics, prosecution and judicial legal understanding, and in part to threats levied against judges, lawyers and witnesses and their families. The measures introduced under the NAP were intended to be temporary, to allow time for reform of the justice system. Significant reforms to the justice system have not yet occurred.

   Consideration and findings

2. I accept that the applicant is a citizen of Pakistan and is from Swat in that country and that Pakistan is the country of reference for his refugee claims.  The evidence before me does not suggest that he has a right to enter and reside in any other country and I am satisfied that he does not.

3. The applicant fears being killed, abducted and assaulted if he returns to Pakistan.  I accept that the persecution he fears involves serious harm as required by s.91R(1)(b) of the Act, particularly when those harms are considered cumulatively.

4. The reasons for the persecution the applicant fears are his membership of the particular social group of persons who oppose the extremist ideology of the Pakistani Taliban. The applicant’s involvement (with his brother [Brother B] who played a high profile role) in the village Lashkar, the VDC, the army operation and in the [School 1] over many years have identified him and would continue to identify him within his community as one of the persons in [Village 1] who obstructed and opposed the Taliban both before and during the military operation in Swat during and after 2009. The co-educational nature of the school run by his family demonstrated to extremists a public opposition to their ideology, as did his decision to identify locals sympathetic to the Taliban cause during the army operation.  I am satisfied that the applicant has the profile of a person who is opposed to the extremist ideology of the Pakistani Taliban and that this is an identifiable social group within Pakistan.  His membership of that particular social group constitutes the essential and significant reason for the persecution he fears, as required by s.91R(1)(a) of the Act.  Based on his past experiences and his fear of being targeted in future, I accept that the persecution he fears also involves systematic and discriminatory conduct as required by s.91R(1)(c).  

   Is there a real chance that the applicant will suffer persecution if he returns to Pakistan?

5. I note that the delegate did not accept that the applicant’s family was involved in a school in [Village 1], that he and his family resisted threats from the Taliban or that the applicant was abducted and tortured for six days, was shot at or involved in the local Lashkar or Village Defence Committee.  The delegate did not accept any of the applicant’s claims and assessed the applicant’s credibility unfavourably. 

6. I note that the delegate did not accept the applicant’s claims of involvement with a school and referred to the applicant’s failure to provide information about the school.   The delegate also stated that they could not locate any evidence confirming the school’s existence in their own internal and external searches. I have had the benefit of assessing internal school documents (which were unavailable to the delegate) which do support the applicant’s family involvement with the school.  Also, when I conducted an internet search, I discovered a list of public and private schools in Swat; and [School 1] was one of many listed private schools.[2]   The delegate also referred to concerns about the applicant being related to the [Alias F] who was killed in Karachi because he found the applicant had a friend of the same name on his [social media] page.   The applicant has now provided additional information demonstrating his relationship to both [Cousin J] and to [Cousin D] and information about their deaths is publicly available and consistent with his description.[3]  I have also had the benefit of a psychiatric report which emphasises his mental health diagnosis and its’ consistency with experiencing trauma and torture such as he describes, and have observed and assessed his evidence during the hearing.  I found the applicant to be coherent, credible and consistent in his evidence before me.  I note that he did not embellish his evidence or his claims before me and provided another consistent description about his experiences.  He offered some potentially important and relevant new information only when I asked him about those specific issues (for example the names of his nieces and nephews and  also when I noted that he had not provided any written claims about his experience of observing people killed by the Taliban-referred to in a sentence in the psychiatric report).   I have taken into account the applicant’s tendency to stumble in his speech when agitated and the possible effect of his mental illness on his capacity to communicate effectively in assessing the credibility of his evidence.  Overall, I found his evidence to be responsive, consistent with his earlier written claims and as recorded in the Delegate’s decision, credible and spontaneous and I assessed the applicant’s credibility favourably, even after taking into account the delegate’s concerns.

   [2] [Source deleted]

   [3] [Source deleted].

7. I  have considered the applicant’s evidence (written, documentary and given in person) and the whole of the material before me, including the delegate’s decision.  Whilst there are some spelling differences in the translation of names on some documents, (for example, of the [Brother G]’s name as [Alias G1], [Alias G2] and [Alias G3] or between [Alias F1 and Alias F2 for Cousin F]) I am satisfied that the applicant has provided detailed, consistent and truthful evidence in describing, restating and clarifying his claims.  I accept that the applicant was describing events that he had experienced when talking about his abduction, being shot at, and also about various life experiences in Pakistan, including the school run by his family, threats against the school and his family, and witnessing violence first hand. 

8. I accept that the applicant is the youngest child in his family and that he has six brothers and one older sister. From the information given during hearing, I note and accept that his brothers are [Brother B], married to [Ms U], with two sons, [Child V] and [Child W]; [Brother R], married to [Ms X] with children [Child Y] and [Child Z];  [Brother K], married to [Ms AA] with no biological children but adopted children [Child AB] and [Child AC]; [Brother G], married to [Ms AD] with children [Child AE] and [Child AF]; [Brother L], married to [Ms AG] with a child [Child AH]; [Brother A], married to [Ms AI], with one son, [Child AJ] and [Sister AK], married to [Mr AL] with two children, [Child AM] and [Child AN].

9. I accept that his brother [Brother G] established a school in [Village 1] called [School 1] and that the school has run since around [year] as a co-educational school.  Initially, the school was for young children but now runs to year [number].  I accept that the applicant’s brother [Brother B] ran the school from at least 2007 to 2013, at which time he handed the school’s management to a different person outside of the family, (a school teacher.)  I have looked at the documents provided (which purport to be school records) carefully.  I note that some of the children of his brothers (whose names he gave me for the first time at hearing without any hesitation) can be seen on the fee schedules to be ‘free’, consistent with the evidence given by the applicant to be the usual practice at hearing.  Two of his brothers are listed as teachers.  I consider that those documents from the school are legitimate records, even though they are not complete.  They generally support the applicant’s claims that his family has been involved in and owned a co-educational school called [School 1].  I note the photos of the [ceremonies] provided appear to be taken at different times over a reasonable period and are general in nature as promotional and historical photographs would legitimately be.  I have also taken into account that the photographs are not staged to include the applicant’s family members (or the applicant) as would be expected if they were ‘fake’ - they clearly also include both girls and boys as students.  Very few of them even include members of his family.  I consider that the existence of these records and photographs and the capacity of [Brother B] to provide them to the applicant strongly supports the applicant’s claims of his family running a school called [School 1] in [Village 1], which was a co-educational school.  I accept that the applicant’s family owned and ran the school.

10. I accept that over many years, the school and the applicant’s brother [Brother B] were targeted by militants in the area opposed to education generally and especially to education of girls.  I accept that multiple threats were issued against [Brother B] in particular, threatening him with harm if the school did not close down and later that such threats were also made against the applicant. 

11. I had some concerns (as did the delegate) about why the applicant’s family would not ‘take seriously’ each and every threat they received, as described by the applicant.  The applicant repeated this in his claims when new threats were made against [Brother B], even after the applicant had been abducted and tortured.  As I explained to the applicant at hearing, it did not seem plausible that his brother would ‘shrug off’ threats of death, despite attacks against himself, the applicant and the school itself over so many years. However, in response, the applicant explained that they had lived their whole lives in that dangerous environment; and he also described his brother [Brother B] in stubborn and perhaps heroic terms, saying that without [Brother B] and [Cousin D]’s strength and leadership in running the school, the village Lashkar and the Defence committee and in resisting the Taliban at every stage, the army would have been unable to drive Fazlullah and the extremists out of the town and take action against sympathisers in the area.  His family strongly believes in education as a means of defeating extremism.  The only reason, in the applicant’s view, that the Taliban does not now have control of Swat is because of his brother [Brother B] and men like him who were brave (and determined) enough to resist and stand up when it counted.  I found the applicants’ evidence about this to be compelling, because on the one hand he acknowledged (and was proud of) his brother’s stubbornness and bravery, but on the other, was clearly distressed by and terrified of the consequences of that bravery, which he had experienced first-hand.

12. Based on the information and evidence before me, I accept that the applicant was abducted from home aged [age], tortured and beaten over several days, and was then released after his family paid a ransom and promised to close down the school.  I accept that this incident has had a significant and ongoing negative impact on the applicant’s mental health, causing him distress and trauma even now that he has left the country. I accept that the applicant participated in the local Lashkar and then in the VDC, assisting his brother and also the army by identifying local extremists who were later ‘neutralised’ by the army.   I accept that the applicant was shot at in 2013, and that at this time his brother finally decided to yield stewardship of the school to someone else and stayed at home to care for his parents. 

13. I accept that several of the applicant’s relations and VDC members have been targeted and killed by extremists, including his cousin [Cousin D] (who played an important role with [Brother B] in the VDC), and his cousin [Cousin F] who travelled to Karachi to escape danger, only to be gunned down there.  I accept that the applicant and his family have historically been targeted and identified as people opposed to the extremist ideology of the Taliban and have repeatedly faced danger as a consequence.  I accept that in around 2009, Fazlullah himself named the applicant’s brother as a person to be killed due to his ‘offending the faith’.   General country information is consistent with this being Fazlullah’s method of exercising control and power at the time.[4] I also note that despite his role and resistance, [Brother B] continues to live in [Village 1].  The applicant is convinced that his family chooses to keep the security situation and dangers and threats faced by his family to themselves, to protect him and his mental state.  He is not aware of any specific harm that has come to his family since he left Pakistan.  Sadly, his mother passed away in 2019, and the applicant was genuinely devastated by her loss when discussing that event during the hearing.   He stated that he wanted to go home for her funeral but his family told him that he must not contemplate doing so, because it was not safe.

    [4] See for example Radio Free Europe article which reports a false earlier death of Fazlullah and describes his brutal control of the region:  (7 November 2013)

14. I have also carefully considered the evidence before me about the applicant’s mental health.  I accept the diagnosis of [Dr T] that the applicant suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder with anxiety and major depression and consider both the diagnosis and the doctor’s description of the applicant’s related experiences which may have caused the condition to be consistent with earlier psychological reports and the applicant’s claims and experiences as he has described them at every stage.  I note the distress and detail with which he responded to my question about his having ‘observed the Taliban killing people’ and the direct and distressed response he had to recalling and describing that experience. 

15. I have considered the country information referred to above and also that information referred to by the applicant’s representative. 

16. I have carefully considered whether the fact that [Brother B] has continued living in [Village 1] with the applicant’s parents suggests that the threat faced by the applicant if he were to return is not as great as he fears.  After all, based on the applicant’s claims, the risk to [Brother B] as the ‘figurehead’ of the school and the village defence committees mean that he too would be at ongoing risk of harm from the very same perpetrators as feared by the applicant.  I note his evidence that [Brother B] has greatly reduced his role in the school and lives a quiet life.  Still, the applicant considers that his family continues to live in fear of being targeted by extremists, both from within their community and outside it.  Whilst the applicant cannot give details of their lives, he feels that they deliberately keep any information about trouble they encounter away from the applicant due to his vulnerability and relative youth. 

17. I accept the applicant’s claims that there is a real chance (in the sense that it is higher than a remote chance) that the applicant will be targeted again by local Taliban members or sympathisers due to his own and his family history within the local area, including involvement with the school, membership in the Lashkar and VDC and because he turned in extremists to the Army during the period of extreme conflict with the Taliban.  I accept that although local Taliban have now largely been pushed out of the region, (and Fazlullah himself killed in June 2018,)[5] some villagers still support the extremists and the religious fundamentalism they espouse.  It is plausible that they (or surviving family members) will bear a strong grudge against the applicant and his family due to their opposition to the Taliban, their involvement with the Army and the loss of homes (and in some cases family members) directly due to the applicant’s actions.  After taking all of the information and evidence before me into account, I am satisfied that there is a higher than remote chance that the applicant will suffer serious harm if he returns to Swat in Pakistan. 

    [5] >

    I also note the country information which reflects that extremists are active throughout Pakistan and continue to attack military and government targets.  I note also the experience of his relative [Cousin F] who was killed even after he left the area to seek safety in Karachi. I have considered the particular mental health vulnerability of the applicant, and the psychological opinions which consider that he would suffer deterioration of his mental health if he returns to Pakistan; particularly if he was without family and community support.  I consider that if he returns to a part of Pakistan outside of Swat, he would have no family or other support, has little work experience and, given those factors and his mental health, would be vulnerable to significant mental health deterioration which, along with his existing profile and involvement in opposing the Taliban in Swat, would also potentially increase the chance that he may come to the attention of any extremists living in a community in which he was residing.  I consider that the applicant’s mental health vulnerability increases the chance that he will be identified as a person from Swat who opposes the ideas of the Taliban.   I accept that there is a higher than remote chance that the applicant will be identified as having come from Swat and that his personal background and history will become known and that he has a real chance of being seriously harmed by extremists in any new community.    I have taken into account that the country information reflects that extremists operate throughout the country and continue to target government, military and civilian targets despite various operations aimed at decreasing the militant threat over many years.   I find that the real chance of harm, (particularly considering the cumulative effect of the integers of his claims and profile) in this case persists throughout Pakistan. 

    State protection

18. I accept that the country information, (including DFAT’s assessment) suggests that state protection is severely compromised in Pakistan due to the predominance in some regions of tribal justice systems, systemic corruption of security and political agencies, an endemic lack of resources for security personnel and the nature of the ongoing extremist threat despite more than a decade of targeting terrorist groups in Pakistan.  I accept that police and security forces in Pakistan are ill equipped to protect individual citizens who are targeted by extremists.  Successful prosecution rates are low, which leads to a perception that extremist attackers enjoy immunity from justice, due to resource deficiencies and corruption throughout Pakistan.    I also note multiple publicly available reports of Village Defence Committee members being targeted for attack and murder over a number of years in various parts of Pakistan since 2009 (including as recently as 2018 and 2019) with very few reports of location and conviction of the perpetrators,[6] consistent with my assessment of the country information.

    [6] See for example:  (2010) and (16 February 2018) and   (18 August 2019).

1. I find that the level of state protection available to the applicant is not at a level which citizens are entitled to expect according to international standards (as per MIMA v RespondentsS152/2003 (2004) 222 CLR 1) and that the State of Pakistan is unable to provide the applicant with protection from the persecution he fears.

2. For the reasons given above, I am satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention. Therefore the applicant satisfies the criterion set out in s.36(2)(a).

   DECISION

3. The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant satisfies s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

   Anne Grant
   Member