1724823 (Refugee)

The applicants, a family of four, sought protection visas, alleging they had suffered attacks in Germany and feared future persecution if returned. They claimed that Muslims had attacked their sister and mother, and that police and legal avenues in Germany had been unable to provide protection. The applicants also stated that they had attempted to relocate within Germany but could not find work, and that the general situation in Germany regarding refugees and crime was deteriorating, making it unsafe for them.

The court was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), which concerns being a refugee with a well-founded fear of persecution, or under section 36(2)(aa), which relates to complementary protection where there is a real risk of significant harm as a consequence of removal to a receiving country. This involved assessing whether the applicants had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and whether effective protection measures were available in Germany. The court also had to consider the meaning of "significant harm" and the circumstances under which a person would not be considered to face a real risk of such harm, including the possibility of internal relocation.

The court reasoned that the applicants had not established a well-founded fear of persecution as defined by the Act, nor had they demonstrated a real risk of significant harm upon return to Germany. The evidence presented did not satisfy the requirements for persecution based on the specified grounds, and the court considered that effective protection measures were available in Germany. Furthermore, the court found that the applicants had not shown that internal relocation within Germany would not be a reasonable option to avoid any potential risk. Consequently, the applicants failed to meet the criteria for a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants protection visas.