1709775 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant, of Igbo ethnicity from Nigeria, claimed to have left his country because his life was in danger due to a family land dispute, asserting that those pursuing the land wanted him dead and that the police were complicit and incompetent. The applicant had entered Australia on a Business Visitor visa and subsequently applied for a protection visa, which was refused by the Department. The AAT was tasked with determining the credibility of the applicant's claims and whether, on accepted claims, the criteria for a protection visa were met.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was the credibility of the applicant's claims and whether these, if accepted, satisfied the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958, or the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). This involved assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or whether there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Nigeria. The Tribunal was required to consider relevant guidelines and country information, including the DFAT Country Information Report – Nigeria, 2020.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa. It found that the applicant did not satisfy any of the criteria in section 36(2) of the Migration Act. The decision indicates that the applicant's claims were not accepted as credible or sufficient to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the requirements for a protection visa, and therefore, the previous decision to refuse the visa was upheld.