1712110 (Refugee)

The applicant, a woman from Colombia, sought review of the decision not to grant her a protection visa. She claimed to fear harm from a paramilitary group in Colombia due to her work as a women's rights activist in Soacha, a municipality near Bogota. Her activism involved empowering women financially and assisting victims of domestic violence, which led to a confrontation with a paramilitary member, resulting in her being bitten, raped, and threatened with death. She asserted that she belonged to a particular social group, "women," who were targeted by this group.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a reason specified in section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), specifically membership of a particular social group, and whether the harm she feared was systemic and at the hands of the state or its agents. The Tribunal was required to assess the credibility of her claims, the consistency of her evidence, and the current country information regarding the situation in Colombia, particularly concerning paramilitary activity and the safety of women's rights activists.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were inconsistent and that her evidence lacked credibility. It noted that she had returned to the same area in Colombia after her first visit to Australia and had delayed applying for a protection visa on her second visit. The Tribunal also considered the prevalence of COVID-19 and the Colombian government's response, but these factors did not overcome the deficiencies in her claim. Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that she had not satisfied the criterion under section 36(2) of the Migration Act.