1817379 (Refugee)

The applicants, citizens of Thailand, sought review of a delegate's decision to refuse them protection visas. They claimed to fear harm from a former boyfriend who was a member of the Thai Army with police connections. The delegate had refused the visas on the basis that State protection was available in Thailand. The applicants had arrived in Australia on student visas in November 2013 and remained unlawfully thereafter, working on a farm. They did not apply for protection visas until January 2017.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants had a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and if not, whether there were substantial grounds to believe that their removal to Thailand would result in a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal was required to consider the availability of effective protection measures in Thailand.

The Tribunal noted that the applicants' last alleged interaction with the former boyfriend was in 2008, and they had lived without incident in Thailand for five years after that, and also in the same village as him without him bothering them. The Tribunal applied section 36(2B)(b) of the Act, which states that there is not taken to be a real risk of significant harm if the applicant could obtain protection from an authority of the country. Considering the evidence, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicants had a well-founded fear of persecution or that they would suffer significant harm upon return to Thailand, finding that State protection was available.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicants protection visas, concluding that they did not satisfy the criteria set out in section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act.