1710906 (Refugee)

This case concerned an appeal by two applicants against the decision of the delegate not to grant them protection visas. The applicants claimed to have been targeted by criminal gangs affiliated with political parties in Pakistan, specifically the Mutahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) and the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), the latter through its criminal wing, the Peoples' Aman Committee (PAC). They alleged demands for tithes, recruitment pressure, and threats, leading them to leave Pakistan in "extreme fear." The applicants also claimed to have experienced robbery and an inability to report these incidents to the police, who allegedly directed them to the PAC.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicants qualified for protection as refugees under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, or alternatively, on complementary protection grounds under section 36(2)(aa). This involved determining if they had a well-founded fear of persecution due to reasons such as political opinion, and if effective state protection was available in Pakistan. The court also considered the applicants' delay in lodging their protection visa applications and their stated economic motivations for migrating to Australia.

The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicants did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa. While acknowledging the applicants' claims of fear and targeting by political gangs, the court noted inconsistencies in their evidence, particularly regarding their residential address in Karachi and their socioeconomic status. The court also considered the possibility of relocation within Pakistan as a means of avoiding risk, and the availability of effective state protection, which was found to be lacking in the applicants' account. The court found that the applicants had not established a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons specified in the Act, nor had they demonstrated a real risk of significant harm upon removal to Pakistan.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicants protection visas. The applicants did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2)(a) or section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958, and there was no suggestion they met the criteria as members of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.