1703251 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Coptic Orthodox Christian woman from Egypt, sought a protection visa in Australia. She claimed to fear persecution from Muslim extremists due to her religious beliefs and her active involvement in church-related social work, which included assisting young Muslim women. The applicant also alleged that her father was killed by Muslim fanatics in 2011 and that she had been a victim of sexual assault. The case was heard by the Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either under the refugee convention (s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958) or under Australia's complementary protection obligations (s.36(2)(aa)). This required the Tribunal to assess if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a convention reason, or if there was a real risk of significant harm upon her return to Egypt. The Tribunal was also required to consider the availability of effective protection measures within Egypt and whether relocation to another area of Egypt would be reasonable.

The Tribunal considered extensive country information regarding the situation of Coptic Christians in Egypt, including reports on sectarian violence, the use of blasphemy laws, and the level of state protection afforded to religious minorities. It noted that while the Egyptian state had the capacity and willingness to provide protection in urban areas, societal discrimination and less robust police presence in rural areas could impact the safety of Copts. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had been a victim of sexual assault and suffered from PTSD and depression. It found that the applicant's active pastoral work, combined with her identity as a Coptic Christian woman, placed her at risk of harm from Islamic extremists and potentially from the state through the application of blasphemy laws, which disproportionately affected Christians. The Tribunal concluded that relocation would not be reasonable due to the pervasive discrimination and the applicant's specific vulnerabilities, including her mental health issues and lack of spousal support.

Accordingly, the Tribunal found that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a convention reason and that Australia had protection obligations towards her under s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act. The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfied this criterion.