1619469 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of Zambia. The applicant claimed he feared persecution upon return to Zambia due to his music, which was critical of the government and police. He alleged he had received death threats and that a close friend who produced one of his songs was killed by police. The applicant had arrived in Australia in 2012 on a student visa and lodged his protection visa application in March 2016, after his second student visa ceased. The decision reviewed was made by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This required determining if Australia had protection obligations towards him, specifically whether he was a refugee as defined by section 5H of the Act, or if he qualified for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa). A key element of the refugee criterion is the existence of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion, race, religion, or nationality, and whether such persecution would be a real chance and relate to all areas of the country.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa. While accepting the applicant's identity and nationality as Zambian, the Tribunal found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution. The Tribunal noted the applicant's failure to attend a scheduled interview with the Department and that his claims of persecution were not substantiated by credible evidence. Specifically, there was no evidence of a public profile that would attract the attention of Zambian authorities, nor was there sufficient country information to support the applicant's claims of widespread persecution of individuals with his views. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's migration history, including the delay in applying for protection and the ongoing partner visa application, which suggested potential separation from his Australian citizen wife and child. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a real chance of suffering significant harm if returned to Zambia.