1711630 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Christian man from Davao City in the Philippines, arrived in Australia in August 1999 on a visitor visa which ceased in January 2000. He remained in Australia unlawfully until March 2015 when he applied for a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether Australia had protection obligations towards the applicant. The decision was made by Roslyn Smidt, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically whether he was a refugee with a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Additionally, the court considered whether the applicant met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which requires substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal, there is a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the protection visa. The applicant's claim of past detention and threats by the New People's Army in the 1980s was not found to establish a well-founded fear of persecution, particularly given his lengthy subsequent residence in the Philippines and his ability to obtain a passport. The Tribunal also found that his generalised fear of Islamic terrorists did not amount to a fear of persecution for a Convention reason. Furthermore, the applicant's health concerns were addressed by country information indicating the availability of a comprehensive universal healthcare system in the Philippines. The Tribunal concluded that Australia did not have protection obligations towards the applicant.