1715327 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision regarding a protection visa. The applicant, Mr A, claimed to be a male homosexual and a member of the LGBTQ+ demographic, asserting that gay men are poorly regarded in Fiji and face ridicule and mistreatment. He provided evidence of past abuse and humiliation, including incidents involving his father and an attack on his shared accommodation, as well as alleged mistreatment by police. 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 met the criteria for a protection visa under section 5J(1)(a) of the Act, specifically concerning membership of a particular social group. It also examined whether, if the refugee criterion was not met, Mr A would face significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, thereby qualifying for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa). In reaching its decision, the Tribunal took into account relevant policy guidelines and country information assessments as mandated by Ministerial Direction No. 56.

The court found that the past mistreatment and harassment Mr A suffered, including from his father and during the home invasion, did not meet the threshold of "significant harm" as defined by the Act. While acknowledging the applicant's claims of abuse and the alleged inaction of the police, the court concluded that these events, in the context of the overall evidence and relevant guidelines, did not establish a real risk of significant harm upon return to Fiji. Consequently, the decision under review was affirmed.