1703435 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of India, sought review of a decision to refuse her a protection visa. She claimed to face persecution and significant harm in India as a divorced single woman, alleging threats from her former husband's family, demands for dowry, and the risk of honour killing and societal shame. The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of country information from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), which indicated that traditional social practices and the low status of women in many parts of India can lead to domestic and gender-based violence, and that divorced women face stigmatisation.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as a refugee, or under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing a real risk of significant harm in India. The Tribunal was required to assess whether the applicant's fear of persecution or significant harm was well-founded, considering the available country information and the specific circumstances of her case.

The Tribunal accepted that India was the applicant's country of nationality and the receiving country for the purposes of her claims. While acknowledging the DFAT reports on the prevalence of violence against women and the stigmatisation of divorced women in India, the Tribunal ultimately found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. The decision notes that there was no suggestion the applicant satisfied the criteria as a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, concluding that she did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the Act.