1703995 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of Ethiopia. The applicant claimed to fear persecution in Ethiopia due to his political opinions, specifically his opposition to the ruling regime and his involvement with opposition parties such as the Coalition for Unity and Democracy (CUD) and later the Unity for Democracy and Justice (UDJ). The applicant's claims included past detention, mistreatment, and the death of his father in detention, as well as the arrest of other family members. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), which relates to Australia's obligations under the Refugees Convention.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his political activities, including his involvement with the CUD in 2005, his subsequent detention and imprisonment, and his later engagement with the UDJ. The applicant testified that he continued to engage in political activities discreetly due to fear of further persecution and torture, and that he was motivated to share his observations of peaceful democratic transitions in Australia with people in Ethiopia. The Tribunal also considered documentary evidence, including a UDJ party membership card and support receipt, and a letter from the UDJ. A specific concern was raised regarding the dating of the UDJ letter, which appeared to be in the Gregorian calendar rather than the Ethiopian calendar, but the Tribunal accepted an explanation for this discrepancy.

The Tribunal found the applicant's evidence regarding his political activities, detention, and the subsequent harm he suffered to be credible and consistent with earlier testimony and country information. It accepted that the applicant had been detained and harmed in 2005 on the basis of his actual or imputed political opinion. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant's desire to express his political opinion, even if subtly, persisted and that his motivation for returning to Ethiopia to share his experiences was compelling. Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugees Convention.

The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies the criterion set out in section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.