1709359 (Refugee)

The case concerned an application for a protection visa by a father and his two children, who were born in Australia. The primary applicant claimed he feared returning to Bangladesh due to his political opinion as a member and activist of the Jamaat e Islami (JI) party. He asserted that his family had long-standing involvement with the JI, and that he had been targeted by supporters of the rival Awami League (AL) during a visit to Bangladesh in 2009. The decision reviewed by the Tribunal was affirmed.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether there was a real chance the applicants would suffer serious harm if returned to Bangladesh due to their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Alternatively, the Tribunal considered whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of their removal, they faced a real risk of suffering significant harm, engaging the complementary protection criterion.

The Tribunal considered the evidence in accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 84, including relevant guidelines and country information. The Tribunal found that the first applicant’s claims were not credible due to inconsistencies and contradictions in his evidence, as well as difficulties with his memory. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that similarly worded letters of support were provided, and that there was a significant delay in the application for protection. The applicants were also perceived to be wealthy returnees from a Western country. Based on these credibility concerns, the Tribunal concluded that the applicants did not meet the criteria for a protection visa.