1824913 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Sierra Leone, sought a protection visa, claiming a well-founded fear of persecution upon return. The dispute centred on whether Australia had protection obligations towards her under sections 36(2)(a) or 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958. The case was heard by Peter Haag, a member of the Tribunal.

The core legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant qualified as a refugee due to a well-founded fear of persecution, or if she faced a real risk of significant harm if removed from Australia. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider if the applicant's fear of being compelled to assume a leadership role in the Bondo society, which would involve promoting female genital mutilation (FGM), and the associated risks to her life and that of her unborn child, constituted grounds for protection. This involved determining if she belonged to a particular social group and if internal relocation within Sierra Leone or the ECOWAS region was a reasonable or practicable option.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's fear stemmed from her refusal to become the head of the Bondo society, a role that would require her to perpetuate the tradition of FGM, a practice she opposes and has undergone herself. Her pregnancy, which is contrary to the customs of the society's leadership, further heightened the risk of severe harm, including potential death or being used as a sacrifice. The Tribunal considered that FGM is widespread across the ECOWAS region and concluded that it would be impracticable for the applicant to relocate within Sierra Leone or the broader region to avoid this persecution. Consequently, the Tribunal found that Australia had protection obligations towards the applicant under section 36(2)(a) of the Act.

The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.