1709164 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Fijian Indian woman, sought protection in Australia due to fears of harm upon return to Fiji. Her dispute arose from an abusive marriage, from which she obtained intervention orders and a divorce. She claimed that her ex-husband and his family could easily locate her in her village, that she would be ostracised by her community due to her divorce and conversion to Christianity, and that authorities in Fiji were corrupt and unlikely to provide adequate protection against widespread domestic violence. The matter was heard by Nora Lamont, a member of the Tribunal.

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 alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing significant harm. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution due to her membership in a particular social group, and if effective protection measures were available to her in Fiji.

The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had experienced significant abuse during her marriage and that she feared her ex-husband, his family, and associates upon return to Fiji. It also accepted that she would be unable to return to her village due to the stigma of divorce and ongoing threats. Considering country information regarding the prevalence of domestic violence in Fiji and the limited availability of services outside of Suva, the Tribunal found that the applicant, as a Fijian woman who had experienced domestic violence, constituted a particular social group. The Tribunal concluded that domestic violence services in Fiji were weak and not accessible in rural areas, and that the applicant would not receive adequate protection from the authorities. Therefore, the Tribunal found that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution and was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act*.

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