1622593 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, claiming he feared persecution if returned to Pakistan. His claims stemmed from an arranged marriage that he called off, leading to threats from the prospective bride's family who considered the matter one of honour. He also raised concerns about his ability to access adequate medical treatment for a pre-existing condition in Pakistan.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, as a refugee with a well-founded fear of persecution, or under section 36(2)(aa), on complementary protection grounds due to a real risk of significant harm if returned to Pakistan. Specifically, the court had to assess if the threats from the family constituted persecution for a Convention reason, and if the inadequacy of Pakistan's healthcare system for his specific medical condition amounted to significant harm.

The court found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. While acknowledging the independent evidence regarding the general security situation in Pakistan, the court was not satisfied that the applicant could not obtain protection from the government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa against non-state actors. Furthermore, regarding the applicant's medical condition, the court determined that the inadequacies of the Pakistani healthcare system, or the inability to access equivalent treatment, did not constitute significant harm as defined by the Act. The court reasoned that such inadequacies were due to the country's economy and were faced by the population generally, rather than being an intentional act or omission directed at the applicant personally, and therefore did not amount to an arbitrary deprivation of life, torture, or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not satisfy the criteria under either section 36(2)(a) or section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958.