1725995 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Refugee Tribunal concerning a protection visa. The applicant, who was born in Peru, claimed to be entitled to protection in Australia on refugee or complementary protection grounds. The core of the applicant's claim was that her father's past involvement as a councillor and member of the Popular Action party in Peru meant she faced a real risk of harm, including alleged past attempts at kidnapping and threatened sexual violence, should she be returned to Peru.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa as a refugee, or alternatively, on complementary protection grounds. Specifically, the Tribunal was required to determine if there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia to Peru, the applicant would suffer significant harm. The Tribunal was mandated to consider relevant guidelines and country information assessments in making its determination.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the evidence presented, including photographs and a letter from the Popular Action party attesting to her father's membership and involvement. However, the Tribunal noted that the evidence did not suggest that the applicant's father or other party members had faced any relevant harm or hardship. Furthermore, the Tribunal observed inconsistencies in the applicant's account, such as changes in address not being disclosed in her original application. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not established that she met the criteria for a protection visa, either on refugee or complementary protection grounds.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant's application for a protection visa was not granted.