1711983 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr A against a decision affirming the refusal of a protection visa. Mr A, an HIV-positive gay man from Thailand, claimed he feared persecution in his home country due to his health status and sexuality, and that he would be unable to afford or access necessary anti-retroviral treatment. He also relied on the social and emotional support provided by his sister, an Australian citizen, who had been his primary support since his diagnosis. The court was required to determine whether Mr A was entitled to protection as a refugee or on complementary protection grounds.

The court considered whether Mr A faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Thailand, as defined by the relevant sections of the Act, and whether Australia had protection obligations towards him. This involved assessing his claims regarding the lack of free access to essential medication, the stigma and discrimination associated with HIV and homosexuality in Thailand, and the absence of a support network upon return. The court also took into account policy guidelines and country information assessments prepared by government departments.

The court reasoned that while Mr A had established a particular social group based on his status as a gay man with HIV, his claims regarding the inability to access ART were not sufficiently substantiated. It noted that Thailand’s Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) provided access to ART, albeit with potential co-payments for specific medications, and that Mr A had not demonstrated he could not afford these. Furthermore, the court found that Mr A had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or significant harm on complementary protection grounds, concluding that the decision under review should be affirmed.