1902373 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by two applicants, who claimed to fear harm if returned to Papua New Guinea. The applicants alleged that Applicant 1's support for a parliamentary candidate in the 2012 elections led to retaliation from supporters of a rival candidate. This retaliation included tribal violence, destruction of property, and threats to the applicants' lives. The applicants further claimed that their fears were exacerbated by escalating tensions surrounding the 2017 general elections. The decision reviewed was made by the Tribunal.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Act, specifically concerning a well-founded fear of persecution based on political opinion, and alternatively, whether they met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). This involved assessing the risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Papua New Guinea, considering the circumstances outlined in sections 36(2A) and (2B) of the Act. The Tribunal was also required to consider relevant guidelines and country information as mandated by Ministerial Direction No. 84.

The Tribunal considered the applicants' claims regarding electoral violence and the subsequent threats to their safety. It noted the provisions for complementary protection, which allow for visa grants if there are substantial grounds for believing a real risk of significant harm exists upon removal. The Tribunal's reasoning, though not fully detailed in the provided text, involved an assessment of the evidence presented in light of the statutory criteria and relevant guidelines.

The decision under review was remitted by the Tribunal.