1832684 (Refugee)

The applicant, who sought protection in Australia, claimed to have witnessed a murder in Fiji in 2002 and feared persecution upon return. The dispute before Deputy Jan Redfern P of the Refugee Tribunal concerned whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically the refugee criterion under section 36(2)(a) of the Act, or alternatively, the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa).

The Tribunal was required to determine if it accepted the applicant's account of the 2002 incident, whether he possessed a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of membership in a particular social group or imputed political opinion, and if not, whether there were substantial grounds to believe he would suffer significant harm upon removal to Fiji, either from former assailants or through serious psychological distress. The applicant contended that any harm would emanate from state authorities, rendering internal relocation within Fiji unviable.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's claims regarding the 2002 incident, finding his account detailed and credible. However, it concluded that the applicant did not meet the refugee criterion under section 36(2)(a). The Tribunal then considered the complementary protection criterion, examining submissions that the applicant faced a real risk of arbitrary deprivation of life or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment from former assailants, and that anticipated psychological harm from removal to Fiji, where he had previously experienced trauma, would engage the criterion. The Tribunal was not satisfied that there was a real risk of physical harm from former assailants. It also noted a concession that the act of removal itself, and any resulting psychological harm, would not engage complementary protection.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under section 36(2)(a) of the Act. The Tribunal's consideration of the complementary protection criterion also did not lead to a finding that the applicant met those criteria.