1710838 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Lebanon, sought a protection visa after her delegate refused to grant it on the basis that Australia did not have protection obligations towards her. The applicant claimed to have been subjected to violence and threats in Lebanon due to her filming an incident involving armed men, and asserted that as a divorced woman without male protection, she was at risk of harm from armed militias, including Hezbollah. She also argued she belonged to a particular social group: a single, divorced woman with no male protection in Lebanon.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether she was a refugee within the meaning of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This involved assessing whether she held a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and whether such persecution would involve serious harm. The court also considered whether she could access effective protection measures in Lebanon or if reasonable steps could be taken to avoid any risk of persecution.

The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant's claims and evidence were inconsistent and evolving. While acknowledging the applicant's stated fear of harm, the court did not find that she had established a well-founded fear of persecution for any of the prescribed reasons. The court's reasoning implicitly addressed the applicant's claim of belonging to a particular social group by not finding her fear to be well-founded, and it was not satisfied that she could not access effective protection or take reasonable steps to avoid harm. The court concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for a protection visa under s 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).