1720380 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Nigerian national and his wife, who was a Bahamian citizen. The applicants claimed they could not return to The Bahamas due to racially targeted crimes and a general risk of harm to foreigners, and that the first applicant could not return to Nigeria due to past political activism and ongoing risks associated with secessionist movements. The court was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically considering both the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) and the complementary protection criterion under s.36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The court considered the applicants' claims in light of Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Refugee Law Guidelines, Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information assessments. The first applicant's past involvement in student unions and secessionist organisations in Nigeria, including detention and maltreatment, was examined. His experiences in The Bahamas, including being shot during a robbery and subsequent threats, were also assessed. The court had to weigh the evidence of past harm and the fear of future harm against the availability of protection in The Bahamas and the general risk of crime faced by the population there.

The court found that while the applicants' profile and the chance of harm were accepted, the availability of protection as permanent residents in The Bahamas, despite the victims of racially targeted crimes there, meant that the complementary protection criterion was not met. The court also noted that the children, being dual nationals of Nigeria and The Bahamas, had invalid applications. Consequently, the decision under review was affirmed.