1712465 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate's decision to refuse protection visas to three applicants from Colombia. The applicants, a mother and her two children born in Australia, sought protection on the basis that the first applicant, their Australian-born daughter, faced a real chance of being kidnapped for ransom by urban criminal gangs operating in Colombia. The delegate had refused the visas, finding that kidnapping for extortion had declined in Colombia and that there was no real chance of serious or significant harm.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This required determining if they were refugees or qualified for complementary protection, as defined by the Act and informed by Australia's obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess whether the fear of kidnapping for ransom constituted a well-founded fear of persecution or serious harm on a Convention ground, or if complementary protection was warranted.

The Tribunal considered evidence including the visa application, departmental records, submissions, and country information. It noted that for protection visa applications made after 16 December 2014, the refugee definition in the Act applies, drawing on Convention concepts. The Tribunal was required to consider the 'Refugee Law Guidelines' and 'Complementary Protection Guidelines' and country information assessments. After reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal was not satisfied that any of the applicants were persons in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations, meaning they did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act, nor the family member criteria under section 36(2)(b) or (c).

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visas.