1722400 (Refugee)

The applicants, citizens of Papua New Guinea, appealed a decision concerning their claims for a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution based on her membership in a particular social group, specifically women perceived to have committed adultery, and the prevalence of violence against women in Papua New Guinea. The matter was heard by Judge Tamara Hamilton-Noy in the Federal Circuit Court.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant would face a real risk of significant harm if returned to Papua New Guinea, considering the alleged systematic and discriminatory nature of the violence she feared. This involved assessing whether the applicant could reasonably relocate within Papua New Guinea to avoid harm, whether she could obtain protection from the authorities, or if the risk she faced was one generally faced by the population. The court also considered the definition of a "member of the same family unit" for the purposes of protection visa applications.

The court accepted the applicant's evidence regarding her background and the attacks she had suffered, including being wounded by an iron rod and sustaining a significant head injury. It was accepted that the applicant feared the woman who had attacked her had a strategy to kill her and that the authorities in Papua New Guinea were perceived as corrupt and unable to provide protection. The court acknowledged the general prevalence of violence against women in Papua New Guinea, as evidenced by documentation provided by the applicant. The court found that the applicant's claims were consistent with her written statements and that she and her family were citizens of Papua New Guinea with no right to reside in a third country.

By consent, the Federal Circuit Court ordered that the matter be reheard by the Tribunal.