1711221 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a woman who claimed she would face persecution upon her return to Samoa due to her conversion to Pentecostal Christianity. The applicant asserted that her home village strictly adhered to evangelical Christianity, prohibiting other forms of Christian worship, and that disobedience to village rules carried severe consequences, including threats of psychological and physical harm. She stated she had no family support in Samoa, having moved to Australia to join her mother and siblings, and feared being ostracized and endangered if she returned. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) reviewed the decision of the Department.

The core legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had genuinely changed her religion from evangelical to Pentecostal while in Australia, and if so, whether there was a real chance of serious or significant harm to her from villagers or chiefs in Samoa due to her religious practice. The Tribunal also considered whether any such persecution would be country-wide. The applicant's nationality as a Samoan national was not in dispute, with Samoa being the receiving country for the purposes of the legislation.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had indeed changed her religion to Pentecostalism while in Australia, based on her consistent and convincing testimony regarding her involvement in a Pentecostal church, her description of its worship style, and her stated love for her new faith. While acknowledging the applicant was unrepresented and had not provided documentary evidence of church attendance, the Tribunal considered her oral evidence sufficient. The Tribunal also considered country information and found that while communal pressure existed in her village to conform to the predominant church, there were no reports of threats or harm directed at individuals for changing their religion. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted the possibility of relocation within Samoa and the potential for support from a new church community, suggesting that harm was not a certainty and that the applicant might find refuge elsewhere in the country.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that the applicant had not established a real chance of serious or significant harm upon return to Samoa.