1905699 (REFUGEE) - [2024] ARTA 167

1905699 (REFUGEE) [2024] ARTA 167 (11 NOVEMBER 2024)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Respondent:  Minister for Home Affairs
Tribunal Number:  1905699
Tribunal:General Member M McAdam
Place:Sydney
Date:11 November 2024
Decision:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and remits the application for a protection visa for reconsideration, in accordance with the order:
(i)that the first named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act; and
(ii)that the second named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act; and
(ii)that the third named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(b)(i) of the Migration Act, on the basis of membership of the same family unit as the first named applicant.

.

Statement made on 11 November 2024 at 11:56am
CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Egypt – religion – Coptic Orthodox – fear of harm from Islamist extremists – church activities and lay leadership roles and husband’s brother a monk – discrimination, abuse and assaults during school and military service, and harassment, insults, threats and attacks in public – wife present at extremist attack during return visit – membership of particular social group – Christian woman – sexual assault and mental health – spontaneous, consistent and persuasive claims and evidence – country information – decrease in incidents in home area – chance of harm not high, but real and not remote, especially at religious festivals and times of political volatility – member of family unit young adult child – other child’s separate application – decision under review remitted
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5H(1)(a), 5J(1), 36(2)(a), (b)(i), 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2
Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 369 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information.
STATEMENT OF REASONS
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 20 February 2019 to refuse to grant the applicants protection visas under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicants, who claim to be citizens of Egypt, applied for the visas on 22 June 2017.
The applicants were represented in relation to the review.
CRITERIA FOR A PROTECTION VISA
The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s 36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s 36(2)(a), (aa), (b), or (c). That is, he or she is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.
Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee.
A person is a refugee if, in the case of a person who has a nationality, they are outside the country of their nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country: s 5H(1)(a). In the case of a person without a nationality, they are a refugee if they are outside the country of their former habitual residence and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to return to that country: s 5H(1)(b).
Under s 5J(1), a person has a well-founded fear of persecution if they fear being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, there is a real chance they would be persecuted for one or more of those reasons, and the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of the relevant country. Additional requirements relating to a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ and circumstances in which a person will be taken not to have such a fear are set out in ss 5J(2)-(6) and ss 5K-LA, which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.
If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s 36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of the visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s 36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’). The meaning of significant harm, and the circumstances in which a person will be taken not to face a real risk of significant harm, are set out in ss 36(2A) and (2B), which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.
Mandatory considerations
In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.84, made under s 499 of the Act, the Tribunal has taken account of the ‘Refugee Law Guidelines’ and ‘Complementary Protection Guidelines’ prepared by the Department of Home Affairs, and country information assessments prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.
Protection visa application
The applicants are a family. The first named applicant is the husband of the second named applicant and the third named applicant is their son. They have another son in Australia who has made separate Protection visa and review applications.
The following is a summary of the claims and information provided in the applicants’ Protection visa application:
a.The first named applicant was born in [Year]. The second named applicant was born in [Year]. The third named applicant was born in [Year].
b.The applicants are Coptic Christians.
c.The first named applicant was born in Sohag in Egypt. He lived in Sohag until 1992. He then lived in [Suburb 1] in Alexandria until May 2013. His parents are deceased. He has [sisters and brothers] who live in Egypt.
d.In Egypt he completed [a subject 1] degree at university and later worked in [job task 1]. He worked in [Country 1] between 2001 and 2006.
e.He left Egypt [in] May 2013 and arrived in Australia [in] May 2013 on a subclass 457 visa.
f.Since the applicant’s arrival in Australia he returned once to Egypt in 2014 to attend his mother’s funeral. His wife and sons have also returned to Egypt for family visits.
g.The applicants are devout and active members of the Coptic Christian church. It has always been dangerous for Coptic Christians in Egypt. The recent spate of targeting of Coptic Christians has significantly escalated the applicants’ fears. Coptic Christians are being systematically targeted and killed by ISIS and other Islamic militants.
h.The applicants hold grave fears for their safety if they return to Egypt. They are readily identifiable as Coptic Christians. Their church activities and attendance make them targets of Islamic militants. They fear being targeted while attending church or travelling to or from religious places of worship.
i.In the two latest incidents Coptic Christians were targeted while attending Sunday service and during a pilgrimage trip.
j.Coptic Christian are increasingly being forced to undertake significant self-imposed restrictions in the practice of their faith merely in an effort to avoid being targeted or killed by Islamic militants. Such level of restrictions includes limiting their attendance at Church, not congregating in large groups with other Christians, and not involving themselves in public religious activities which makes them vulnerable to attacks.
k.The applicants will be forced to limit their religious activities as a consequence of not only the rising level of Muslim hostility and militancy in Egypt but also due to the fact that they do not have effective protection from the Egyptian authorities. Relocation to another part of Egypt is neither a viable nor a practical option given the fact that Muslim militancy and targeting of Coptic Christian is occurring throughout the country and is not limited to one city or district of the country.
l.Support for Muslim militancy in Egypt is becoming a pressing and widespread problem. Christians remain vulnerable to attack as they are viewed as nonbelievers who are deserving of death.
m.The second named applicant’s parents and one sister are living in Egypt. She completed [a subject 2] degree at university in Egypt. She has never had paid employment.
n.The third named applicant completed high school in Australia.
The applicants provided copies of their Egyptian passports with their Protection visa application.
On 18 September 2018 the applicants provided a copy of a letter from a Priest of a Sydney Coptic Church confirming the applicants’ active participation in the church. The Priest also stated that the first named applicant’s brother is a devout monk in Egypt and that a devout Christian family is always singled out and targeted by extremists.
Departmental Interview, 19 September 2018
Only the first named applicant attended the Department interview. The following is a summary of the information he provided in the Department interview:
a.He went to [Country 1] twice, in 1991 for one year and then later in 2001 for about five years.
b.The Delegate put to the applicant that country information indicated Coptic Christians were a significant minority in Egypt. The applicant stated that a great percentage of churches have closed down by fanatics.
c.The Delegate put to the applicant country information that most Egyptians in urban centres work and live without much regard to each other’s religion. The applicant responded that Muslims believe Christians are infidels.
d.The Delegate put to the applicant that country information indicated the number of attacks on Coptic Christians have been relatively small in relation to the whole population of Coptic Christians. The applicant responded that not all attacks are reported and that the government was cooperating with the extremists.
e.The Delegate put to the applicant that country information indicated the government was providing protection to Coptic Christians. The applicant responded yes that is correct the President is good but the people on the ground make the attacks.
f.The Delegate put to the applicant that country information indicated the Egyptian government has called on Muslim leaders to call for tolerance. The applicant responded yes the government and authorities provide protection but the Muslim brotherhood and the extremists on the ground do the attacks, such as the bomb on the church. The government tries to provide security but is unable to protect people.
g.The Delegate put to the applicant that country information indicated Coptic Christians face a remote chance of being targeted by ISIS and extremists. The applicant stated incidents happen all the time. There was an incident in Alexandria when 30 people were killed while the Pope was present; and another incident in Tansa when more than 60 people were killed in April 2017. Another incident in May 2017 targeted buses carrying children between Cairo and Alexandria and children were killed. This month there was an incident in Minya when all the houses were destroyed and looted and the church was burned down.
h.The government is not acting enough. There is cooperation by the government. The President is good but there are Muslim Brotherhood members in power who are not good. There were many other incidents before 2017. The Muslim Brotherhood want the country run by Muslims as it was under Hosni Mubarak.
i.The Delegate put to the applicant that the Muslim Brotherhood has been outlawed and its members arrested. The applicant replied that they are like an octopus with its arms everywhere.
j.The attacks on Coptic Christians have been going for the last 7 or 8 years, they have been particularly hard.
k.The applicant came to Australia with his wife and children because he had an issue in Alexandria. He was a servant to the aged people.
l.The Delegate put to the applicant that his subclass 457 visa was valid until March 2017 and that in February the applicant applied or a further subclass 457 visa which was refused in March 2018. The applicant responded yes and he has applied for review of the refusal. The Delegate put to the applicant that he later applied for a Protection visa. The applicant responded this was because his wife was in Egypt at the time and was subject to attacks so he told her not to go to Egypt again. His wife witnessed the incidents he had spoken about. The Delegate asked the applicant why he did not apply for a Protection visa instead of another subclass 457 visa. The applicant responded it was because he was not under threat in Australia. The applicant said it was due to the incidents during 2017 when his wife and children were there. These made him scared.
m.The applicant’s wife witnessed the incidents in 2017.
n.The Delegate put to the applicant that he had stated most Muslims are against Coptic Christians. The applicant responded that there are some good Muslims. The Delegate put to the applicant that his wife had returned to Egypt on several occasions, in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 around the same time of the year each time, and for a matter of months each time. The Delegate put to the applicant that this indicates the applicant’s wife did not have a fear in Egypt. The applicant responded that the risk is primarily on him because he is the servant in the church and his wife is not as visible in the church as the applicant. His wife is also a servant of the church so would return to Egypt each year to perform her service to the church at particular events. His wife performs some activities which are not as visible as his. He helped the aged in Alexandria, particularly those without other family members. He would arrange vehicles to pick them up to take them to the church and some recreation activities. This caused some Muslim fanatics to have hate and resentment to him. They would flatten his car tyres and broke the car glass. They threatened to kill him. They were extreme Muslims with the long moustaches, the Salafists. They would threaten him with knives, ‘white water’ which means anything except firearms. The applicant was threatened three times.
o.The Delegate asked the applicant why he had not mentioned this when he was asked why he applied for a Protection visa and he answered it was because his wife had witnessed attacks. The Delegate asked why he had not applied for protection if he had been attacked as he just stated. He responded it was because his visa was valid at the time but his wife then said she did not want to go back. His wife did not want to apply for a Protection visa earlier because then she would not have been able to return to Egypt to do her church servant activities. He and his wife love to serve. His wife is very connected to her community in Egypt. They arranged food and events for the aged people. The applicant showed invitations with dates in March in various years, five in Egypt and one in Australia.
p.The applicant did not include in his Protection visa application that he was attacked by Salafists with knives in Egypt because he thought he could say it verbally later.
q.The applicant did not apply for a Protection visa earlier because he was not under threat at the time. It was not until his wife witnessed the attacks. If they had applied earlier his wife would not have been able to go back to Egypt. On the occasions she went back his wife was under threat and at risk but not as bad as what she witnessed in 2017, four attacks in one months.
Delegate’s Decision
The Delegate accepted that the applicants are Coptic Christian.
The Delegate did not accept that the applicant is a high-profile religious figure or religious charity practitioner at his home location. The Delegate considered that the activities the applicant engages in for his church and congregants are not controversial, sensitive or otherwise likely to bring him to the adverse attention of religious extremists in Egypt. The Delegate considered that the applicant could continue his work transporting elderly Christians to church in Egypt and continue with his other work within the church without being exposed to a real chance of coming to the adverse attention of Muslim extremists or anybody else.
The Delegate did not accept that the applicant was attacked or targeted by extremists in Egypt.
The Delegate considered that there was no reason to believe that the applicant would engage in activities described in cited reports that could lead to communal violence and result in him facing a real chance of sectarian violence in Egypt.
Information to the Tribunal
Pre-Hearing Submission
On 7 and 12 August 2024 the applicants submitted the following further materials to the Tribunal:
-A letter from [Dr A] and a list of medication regarding the second named applicant.
-A Statutory Declaration by the first named applicant.
-Invitations to events at [Church 1], [Suburb 1] in 2010, 2013 and 2014.
-Photographs of the applicants with Coptic Church clergy, family, and other congregants.
-A Statutory Declaration by the second named applicant.
The letter from [Dr A] is dated 1 August 2024 and states that the second named applicant “has ongoing mental symptoms including low mood stressed anxious with sleeping issues she has low self esteem with fears.” She takes medication to control her symptoms.
In the first named applicant’s Statutory Declaration he writes the following:
… I have five siblings, one is [Father B], a monk. My second oldest is [Mr C], who lives in [Country 1]. The third sister is [Ms D], who lives in Cairo. The fourth is [Ms E], who lived in Sohag, she passed away [on] [Date], finally my sister [Ms F], who lives in Alexandria.
When I was in middle school, I was slapped on the face really hard by a teacher, as I was asked to write a comprehension about the Prophet Mohamed. After I wrote the assignment and handed it over, I was slapped really hard, as I did not say the proper title for Prophet Mohamed, after saying his name. I should have said "Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam", meaning Allah sends prayers upon him and peace. She saw that as a disrespect for the prophet'.
Also, in Arabic class, whenever we had to recite anything form the Quran the teachers would make me chant it as it is chanted in their religion and put my hands behind my ears, as if I am praying it like them. The Arabic classes were turned into religious classes.
Military Service
I did my military service in the army in Cairo. They were two difficult years in which I suffered from discrimination as a Christian.
I was always exposed to punishment; I had no right to complain or object.
When I faced a situation where another soldier at the army mocked Pope Shenouda, who was our pope at the time, and I defended him, I was summoned by my senior officer, and he hit me in the face. It was painful to the point that I felt as if my eyes were turning blue from the severity of the pain.
Another time, I was also subjected to their ridicule of priests, and because | have a monk brother in the [Monastery], I defended priesthood and my religion, and even though this time, I was talking calmly, I was still not spared from punishment, reprimand, or
threats.
Living and serving in Egypt
After military service, I went to Alexandria in the [Suburb 2] area, and there I was staying with my sister and working.
I also served in Sunday schools for young children in [Church 2]. The area there was of low social economic standards, and I was subjected to many verbal threats, spitting, being called an infidel and even thrown with rocks.
If I was alone, I would have answered most of these times or defended my faith, however, as I had young children with me, who I was taking to church and returning them to their homes, I had to be quite and avoid the harm.
On one occasion I was subjected to an attack from a person on a motorcycle who deliberately tried to run me over. It was early in the morning, and no one was with me to try to take the motorcycle's number plates. I was walking just next to the footpath, where no vehicles or motorcycles would pass, and he came and hit me and called me an infidel and drove away. I called my sister's husband so that he would come and help me and get me medical attention.
At that time, I met my wife's family in a monastery. I started working with my future father-in-law in a small [business] that he had in [Suburb 3], Alexandria. After a while, I proposed to my current wife, I went to [Country 1] for work, as God opened a great opportunity for me there. I stayed in [Country 1] for about a year and a half.
Returning to Egypt
After I came back, I got married in 1996 and lived in [Suburb 1], near [Church 1].
After I got married, I started serving in [Church 1]. I actually served the elderly and those in need of care. I used to take them to the doctor, follow up on their social and psychological condition, or take them to Mass on Fridays.
We devoted Friday to service because it was the only day off when I was in Alexandria.
We used to take the elderly people to attend Mass in the church, then we would have breakfast together and do some activities with some of the services or the youth, and then we would return home.
Many times, we would go out to visit monasteries and other churches. Sometimes we would go to public places to the beach to change the atmosphere because these were elderly people, and they did not have anyone to take them out or take them for a walk.
I used to have one of the lady servants with me, so that when we picked up the elderly women, she would help her dress and prepare for church. One time, the lady servant called me, and I went out with her after she had prepared the old woman so that we could support her and take
her down from her flat to the street so we can go to church. I found the four wheels of my car on the ground, broken. We had to take the old woman back up to her house again.
Through my frequent visits to the elderly, there were young people who would talk to me from the area to learn more about the service and they wanted to participate and benefit from the services. I would take advantage of the opportunity and preach and talk about Christ and how serving him would change their lives.
We also did other services, such as driving the elderly to their appointments, if they were visiting their doctors or visiting their children, or anything like that.
Some young people wanted to join the service, but of course if they were Muslims, it was not appropriate for them to join the church. The others in the area would see Christian and Muslim youth speak to me in the street.
At this time, I went back to [Country 1] again to look for job to better our income. I went to [Country 1] for about five years from 2001 and returned in 2006. I tried to get a work contract for my work, so that we could live there with my children, but I failed. We could not afford living there with only one income.
After I came back, I tried to look for another place to live that was far from that area we lived in previously. We actually moved to a second apartment, in the same suburb [Suburb 1], but near the area of [Location], away from the lower economic area.
When I came back to Egypt, I bought a shop in [Suburb 1] and I turned it into a [shop], as I had experience in this field by then. I continued serving in the same services l used to do before I travelled, and I was exposed to many threats.
Even the people who used to come to work in the shop were scared out of fear because once the glass on the shop was broken, and another time they attacked me and stole what was in the safe.
They even tried to entice the girl who was working in the shop to change her religion and become a Muslim.
There was a lot of incitement that no one should come and buy from my shop, and the situation started to deteriorate.
In the meantime, the Muslim Brotherhood was fully active in Egypt.
When I returned from [Country 1] and started my service again, I found them threatening me again.
During this time, I was studying at university by correspondence. I was doing a Bachelor of [Subject], as I knew it would help me in my business. On my last exam day at college, the January Revolution of 2011 took place. All means of communication were cut off. The exam hall was attacked by rocks, and we had to leave immediately.
My wife was sitting at home, unable to reach me. I couldn't talk to anyone. it was a terrible coup. Extreme terror. I walked home on foot from the college to [Suburb 1]. People were running left and right. There were fires in the police station. Prisoners escaped and there was extreme terror and chaos in Egypt. We lived very difficult days with fear and terror.
We, the residents of our building, would go down at night to protect our buildings from theft and attacks. The situation began to get worse, and I began to think to take my wife and children and leave.
After the revolution, from 2012 till 2013, Morsy held presidency in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood was in power at that time and Christians were persecuted much more than before.
During this period, in my service, I was exposed to many threats and harm. One time I was held up with a weapon by one of the extremist Salafi Muslim youths, because he tried to attract the lady servant who served with me to Islam and telling her it was not proper to enter houses with a man (meaning me). When I confronted him, to tell him to stay away, he threatened to beat me. He actually broke the car window, and there was panic and fear inside us because there was more than one person with him, not just him.
I was exposed to another two weapon attacks between 2012 to 2013 whilst doing my service.
The attacks became frequent. and threats became very real and as it was the third time I was attacked by a weapon. I knew by then that these were not random attacks, and I was personally targeted and I became to be very scared, not just for my life, but more importantly for my family's life, as they had threatened me a few times to harm my family.
l would never give up my service, unless I felt I was in real danger. I started looking for another work contract and I found one that would get me to Australia. I was so happy this contract allowed me to bring my family with me.
My wife [the second applicant] already had her sister here in Australia since 2008, so we were lucky that we had someone who would assist us with settlement when we came. [The second applicant] had already came to visit her sister in January 2013 and she said the country was very safe for our family.
[The second applicant] came back in February 2013 and when the work contract was approved on 21 March 2013, and we all came [in] May 2013. l was afraid to return to Egypt again and the only time I returned to Egypt since l came to Australia was in October 2014, for 2 weeks, to
attend my mother's 40 days memorial after per passing.
My wife on the other hand was doing other services that she did not want to stop. Her patron Saint is Pope Kyrollos and she would go in his feast every year in March from 2014 to 2017 to prepare for his feast, which was a very big event in all the churches of Egypt. She was one of the main organisers for these events and this service was very important to her and she felt it was her duty to continue.
If I was not in real danger in Esypt, I would not have left everything behind and remained in Australia. I left my family, my businesses, my apartments and everything I had in Egypt and came to Australia to be safe. I did not want to be the reason for preventing my wife from continuing a service that she loved and hence we did not do protection as soon as we came.
I thought, we could remain safe in Australia through my work sponsored visa and as long as we were safe, I did not think of doing a protection claim. This was until my wife was exposed to a terrorist attack in Egypt in 2017, when she was there in March for her usual service and she was inside the church and saw death with her own eyes, inside the Cathedral (St. Mark Church) in Mahatet El Raml, during Palm Sunday. She went to take the blessings of Pope Tawadrous before her return to Australia, as he was praying the Palm Sunday mass there. She was inside the church attending the mass when this occurred. She saw a girl killed and there was extreme chaos, as she and everyone else tried to escape and to save the injured.
My wife came back to Australia in total horror and shock. She was too terrified to talk, of anyone to touch her.
She would never return to Egypt.
We have been here for 11 years and this is the longest period I have stayed with my wife with our children living a stable and safe life.
l comply with all Australian laws. I have been working very hard. We have purchased a house for our family and we pay $4000 a month on land tax. I have been contributing to the community and always try to be beneficial to the community in return for the great life God has
blessed us with. We appreciate the peace and freedom we live in and we would never jeopardise or underestimate the security and peace we have in Australia, which we hope the Tribunal will allow us to remain living in.

In the second named applicant’s Statutory Declaration she writes the following:
… I strongly believe that as a Christian, my missions to spread the good news that our Lord Jesus was incarnated, came to the earth, died and rose to call us all to Salvation. This is why we serve and preach the word of God. It is an integral part of my faith which I can not stop.
Stopping service or speaking about my faith is like being a non-practising Christian. It would be hypocritical for me. This service caused a lot of persecution and harm to our family. Being a Christian in Egypt is alone sufficient to experience hate, persecution, abuse, discrimination, and mistreatment, especially as a Christian woman.
The first story that really tired me out was that when I was in the sixth grade, my mother was accused of converting Muslim girls to Christianity. She was working [in] [a workplace] in Alexandria and she was accused of making Muslim girls become Christians. During the investigations, we were forced to go live in Menoufia. We lived in Menoufia with my grandmother. We stayed there for a very long time, probably most of the summer months, because of this problem, because my mother received threats, and was under psychological pressure.
Investigations were going on and this was because there was a [person] of Mum’s in the [workplace], and one of the [staff] there was named [name deleted], I remember until now, he was trying to convert this [person], and Mum was advising her to stay away from him and telling her, “Don’t go to him, don’t change your religion, and leave Christ.” She was afraid for her from the, and when the [staff] knew that she was trying to prevent her from him, he started saying [staff] that she was taking Muslim girls so that they would become Christians.
We are Christians and as usual we speak in the name of Jesus and in the Bible and this is our normal thing. When they accused her of this charge and she was under psychological pressure and under pressure from the investigations of the prosecution, these were very difficult days in which I lived far from my mother and father and from our home and I stayed with my grandmother in the countryside village. They were some of the hardest days because I was very attached to my mother, and I couldn't even sleep at night because of the many disturbing dreams. I remember that period very well. No matter how much we spent the day at our relatives' house, I would come back at night tired and upset and couldn't sleep as I had nightmares of my mother being killed.
After a very short period, my mother was transferred to become [an occupation 1] in [a workplace 1]. After a short period, my mother became very tired psychologically and when she got a contract in [Country 1] to work there, she went and worked and left us. We were deprived of her, but because we were afraid for her, we knew this was better for my mother than to be charged in Egypt or to be put in prison. We agreed for her to travel, and she would come down to see us and go back to [Country 1] again. Mum would come for very quick visits so that she wouldn't be exposed to any harm.
I can't describe the amount of suffering I went through. My grandmother came and stayed with us for two years in Alexandria and then she passed away and I had to take responsibility for the house. I was still a child; I mean I was still in the third year of middle school.
When the harassment started to increase at home, we were in a popular area in [Suburb 3]. When the harassment started, my father was afraid for us, and we returned to live in the village with my aunts. We stayed there for about two years or two and a half years. I finished high school and returned, but I did not return to our old house. We returned to another house in [Suburb 1], a different area far from the area we lived in. I started serving in the church as usual, we are very attached to the church.
I entered [an educational institute] for 2 years, where I forced to study Islamic law. I do not know how to describe the number of insults that were embedded in the Islamic law lectures. If someone spoke or objected to correct what was being said, they would fail straight away. It happened to me, because I objected to what was being said about Christianity.
I completed my first year of [studies] and repeated five subjects. I had never failed a year before that. I had always succeeded. It was the first year in my entire life that I failed because I spoke and objected because they were saying incorrect things that did not agree with in the name of Jesus Christ. I defended my faith in front of a Sheikh and my entire class, because they were taking us an Al-Azhar Sheikh to teach us Islamic law, and this was a mandatory lecture that we couldn’t miss, and if we missed it, we would lose mark. When he insulted Christianity, I got up to speak to correct what he was saying about my religion, there was only one other Christian friend with me who remained silent, but I wasn’t committed to silence and of course I got punished for this academically.
I was harassed a lot in the street when I lived in the popular area in elementary school. I was going back and forth in the street, and they would say to me, “Christian Infidel” and they would harass me and follow me to get close to me physically.
Once I was riding a train, going to visit one of our friends and a man was behind me, he did things that are difficult for me to describe, I can only describe it as the worst type of physical abuse. Any type of sexual abuse doesn’t actually just affect you physically, it haunts you psychologically for the rest of your life. I don’t know how the whole cart was empty, I was frozen and terrified, but I seized the opportunity and ran off the train because I was next to the door. I ran, and the train was still standing, and as I was terrified, I actually got on another train.
After we returned from the village where we lived and I entered the institute, I was subjected to the harassment of the Al-Azhar sheikhs who used to come to lecture. I finished three years in the intermediate institute and stopped studying. After I got married, I completed my studies so that I could work in the field I love. I enrolled in a program to obtain a bachelor’s degree in [subject 2], and we would go to work for field training. My training supervisor [was] very harsh with me; she would throw my things on the ground and claim that I hadn’t done the work properly. She even accused me of bringing my small son with me during my training, which never happened. I trained with more than five other students, but I was the only Christian among them. She always accused me of being short. I would go home crying and devastated because of the humiliation she inflicted on me in front of my colleagues, which caused me severe psychological harm.
My family had a [shop] that sold [products] in [Suburb 4]. After I finished my studies, I couldn’t find a job in my specialty, even though I loved it very much. But I didn’t succeed in finding a job in the government or in [specified workplace] or even in [other specified workplaces], as my name was clearly Christian, so I worked in this [family] business for a while.
During this time where I work in our own family business, as Christians, we were exposed to harassment, theft, robbery, threats. Officers who were supposed to protect us, would tell us things like “You don’t know who we are. I can take you behind the sun and close your shop”, just to take money from us.
One day when one of the officers said this, I was standing in front of him and I stated, “You can’t do anything to me unless God allows you to do something to me.” I was standing behind the counter, but his voice was very loud. He was threatening me that he might close this shop. He started to get louder and threaten me more. He said, “You don’t have a place among the shops here, and I will close it for you.” I told him, “You can’t do anything. Whatever God allows, our Lord Jesus Christ is stronger than you. Whatever He allows is what will happen, not what you tell me to do.” Then he got very angry and slammed his hand on the counter where I was standing, and I was dying of fear and terror. He left after threatening and promising that he will not leave us in peace.
After a while I got engaged and married and I was serving in Sunday School for young children inside the church. My husband on the other hand started serving in the church to bring the elderly women and men from outside the church and bring them to the church I would receive them from inside the church because he did not want me to get exposed to more harm in the street.
When his service started it became known among the Muslim people in the area that Christian people would go down and serve the elderly. Then they started to ask the elderly about who would come and take you and where are they from and why do they enter your house.
My husband was exposed to them hitting the glass of the car and another time he went out to bring the elderly woman with the Lady servant after she was dressed and ready, he came down and found the four wheels broken on the ground, also he was threatened with a knife while he was bringing one of the elderly women inside the house.
Even though my husband was afraid as his car had been vandalized more than once, in addition to being threatened with weapons, we insisted on serving despite the extreme fear we were facing.
The harassment was constant because the time for the end of the service at church and the return of the elderly to their homes was the same as the time for the Friday prayer for Muslims, which was at 11:00 or 12:00pm. They would spread carpets on the ground, and my husband could not take the elderly woman to her home, so he had to stop the car far from the house.
He did not know how to even drop the elderly woman off in front of her house’s door, meaning he had to stop far away and there were many difficulties until he took the elderly woman to her home above it.
We opened our shop in [Suburb 1], it also sold [products]. [In the vicinity], there were warehouses called [Name] warehouses, and they still exist. There were many times when workers would come to me from this shop, thinking that I worked there.
Even after they found out who I was, the owner of the shop, they would say, “Why don’t you convert to Islam? You will be marrying a respectable, wealthy man. What makes you work like this? When you marry a Muslim, he will protect you, and you will wear the hijab and stay at home, and he wouldn’t want you to work.” I would respond as politely as possible, saying, “Either you get out or you don’t come here again.”
Our buildings were called police officers’ buildings, but even then, we were not safe.
When the revolution came, and those were also very, very difficult days for us. The police themselves used to hide that they were police officers as they were afraid of the Brotherhood. When we see that the police are afraid to show themselves to the Brotherhood, you cannot imagine how we felt as civilians.
Those were very difficult days. My husband would go down to protect his shop with a very large group of residents, but not all of them were officers, because they were afraid that they would be attacked at any hour, at any time, because there were major acts of violence and sabotage.
The attacks were mainly on Christian shops, churches, apartments of the Christians. Christian business owners were exposed to looting and threats, and it was very, very, very difficult days.
My son who used to go to school was getting kicked out of class during religion lessons because he is a Christian and he was getting mistreated as a young boy simply because of his religion. I discovered how much he as suffering when he said to me, “Mum, why am I being punished, why are they kicking me out and treating me bad?” Even when I tried to transfer him, there was no school that would accept him near us because he was Christian.
One of the schools told me over my dead body that your son will enter here. This school principal because he was a very fanatic Muslim, did not want my son to even try to take the acceptance exam or interview. I finally managed to transfer my son from the school, and when I transferred him, I found that the teachers, the Muslims, were also very fanatical.
One time, I got summoned to go to the school to attend due to my son’s behaviour, however, he was a normal child who played. When he thew an empty can of soft drink into the basketball hoop (instead of a ball), they wanted to kick him out of the school. As a result of this constant bullying, I had to transfer him to a third school. Life for him as a Christian child was difficult.
My second son, [the third applicant], who used to play handball, was mostly not allowed a chance to play with the group. He was always left to sit on the bench as a spare. He used to get very tired psychologically and would talk to the coach. Who would say, "No, just a little bit more," but he used to ignore him.
When I used to go to our shop, before I started driving, I used to go by public transportation. The number of insults, harassment and abuse I was exposed to as a Christian made me not even want to go down to work.
We lived through very terrifying days of fear and difficult days.
I could not believe that my husband received a work contract in Australia. It was a chance to gather our family. I did not want my children to live separated from their father or from me, like I had to be separated from my mother.
I could not be away from my children. I could not repeat the issues that happened with my mother when she travelled and fled to [Country 1] because of the case in which she was accused. My psychological state was affected. I still suffer from depression and fear. We all came to Australia, living in one house. Even when my son got married, they stayed with us.
After we moved to Australia, I started traveling back to Egypt every year. We moved in May 2013, and the next year, in March 2014 (or the end of February), I went to attend the senior citizens’ celebration in our service instead of my husband, [the first applicant], who couldn’t travel due to numerous attacks which occurred to him, I travelled back four times, with the last trip being in 2017, which was a very difficult time for me.
After attending the mass at [Church 1] in [Suburb 1], I wanted to go receive a blessing from Pope Tawadros. He was praying at St. Mark's Church. After the mass, I went to St. Mark's Church to receive his blessing and greet him. I entered the church through the security gate to check for any devices or belongings, and everything went smoothly. Inside the church, the church was nearly done, so I rushed to greet the Pope because I had only a week left before traveling back to Australia. As I entered the church, I heard the explosion. I couldn't comprehend what that loud explosion was. I never imagined it could be a bomb. I thought things had improved under Sisi’s rule, but there was chaos, sirens, police, and screaming. It was terrifying.
I tried to see what happened, but people stopped us from leaving. We were inside the church, not in the courtyard. It took a long time to figure out what had happened and to get out. Once we managed to get to the church gate, I tried to contact someone to pick me up, but there was no network. All the phones, including those around me, had lost signal. I was scared to take a taxi on my own. After a long time, I walked outside the church, trying to find a taxi and get a phone signal to call my father to pick me up.
When I finally left the church, I saw bodies scattered everywhere, fingers and legs. I particularly remember a young girl [who] died; they had covered her with newspaper. It was the hardest scene because I imagined my children could have been there if we had all gone to receive Pope Tawadros's blessing. After that, I walked a long distance to find a taxi, terrified and unsure who was in the taxi. It took about an hour or two for the network to come back. My father and mother were trying to reach me, and eventually, I told them I was in a taxi on my way home. They were extremely worried, unable to contact me.
A year before that in 2016, during the Easter celebrations, my mother and I were attending mass. She went ahead to hail a taxi while I was still upstairs. That day, someone saw her coming out of the church, called her an infidel, hit her, and left her on the ground. I was supposed to be in her place if I had gone down first. When she called me for help, I rushed down. We called an ambulance, and she was diagnosed with a pelvic fracture, bedridden for a long time. I postponed my travel to take care of her until she got better.
After the 2017 events, particularly the bombings at St. Mark's Church in Alexandria and St. George’s Church in Tanta, and being inside the church when the bombing occurred, I was terrified to remain in Egypt or ever return to it. I feared for my children, imagining them in place of the children I saw lying there on at St. mark’s church on April 9.
I returned very afraid, deeply depressed, and had to take antidepressants. I didn’t want to wake up, go anywhere, or do anything, always sad and terrified. Every time I remembered the events, I had nightmares. It took a long time for the images to fade, but even now, I still see those scenes and imagine myself dead or my children in that situation. I told my husband that we couldn’t go back, that none of us could return. I couldn’t even go to a lawyer to file a case. I told my husband I didn’t want to go back, fearing for our children. I’m not going back to Egypt or Alexandria again.
We felt safe because of the strength of the family together. We felt that we were a family. There was no fear. We walk in the street normally. I go to the market normally, I move normally, I go to work, and I can freely wear normal clothes. In Egypt, I never knew how to wear what I wanted without being abused. I was forced to cover up to avoid the abuse.
I cannot go back to live in Egypt in a terrifying atmosphere. We are safe with our children here and we cannot go back to such abusive and dangerous persecution simply because of our religion, something we will never forsake or deny. We paid money to the army so that our children don't join the army and get persecuted there and we left everything we had to flee from suffering that we lived in Egypt.
On 19 September 2024 the applicants’ Representative submitted a psychological assessment report on the first named applicant and the second named applicant from a counsellor, [named].
Tribunal Hearing
The applicants appeared before the Tribunal on 13 August 2024 and 23 September 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic and English languages.
The following is a summary of the information provided by the first named applicant at the hearing:
a.His son [the third named applicant], lives with lives with them. [The third applicant] has worked in various jobs but does not have stable employment. The first named applicant and second named applicant help him from time to time and sometimes he helps them. When he is out of work the first named applicant and second named applicant support him. He may get engaged at some time but it is early stages.
b.In Egypt the first named applicant lived in Sohag province until 1990. He then did his army service and moved to Alexandria in 1993. He lived in Alexandria for around 20 years. He also lived in [Country 1] for 18 months.
c.He moved to Alexandria in 1993 because he was subjected to problems in childhood and primary school.
d.He has a brother who is a priest and lives in a monastery between Cairo and Alexandria. It is [Monastery] in [Location].
e.In [Country 1] the first named applicant worked with [job task 1].
f.In Egypt he had two [shops] in Alexandria. His wife would manage the shops when he was away. She did not do other work because she had no opportunity. At the college she was subjected to some pressure. She did graduate. Because of the pressure she went through mental stress and did not like to interact with people, even at the [shop].
g.His three brothers live in Egypt and keep to themselves. The eldest is in the monastery. His eldest sister [Ms D] mainly stays at home. They don’t have much interaction with each other outside work. His sister [Ms F] is in Alexandria. She is a housewife and does not work. She is married to a cousin. Her family do not live close. They are about 35 minutes away in another district.
h.He attends [Church 1] in [Suburb 1]. [Ms F] and her family attended another church.
i.The service he did for the church in Alexandria was driving elderly Christian people. He would drive them to church, doctor appointments, visits to family and visits to other monasteries. For example he took them to his brother’s monastery. There was no other service he did. His position at the church was ‘shammas’ or deacon.
j.Many people attended the church. About two to tree hundred attended with more on special occasions. He does not know if anyone else in the church had problems similar to his. Problems happened with some people but he did not know them. The priest would tell the congregation about the problems. Fanatics would cause a problem and they would witness that. The priest himself is under political pressure. President Sisi would celebrate only in public or on the surface but he did not really act. Media would say it is good but the security wasn’t good.
k.The church was under pressure. If they wanted to do renovations or build a church they would have a problem. There were many cases of abductions of girls who were converted to Islam. This happened at his church. [Named person] was abducted from the church during Morsi’s rule, in 2013-2014. She was enticed by Islam financially but security intervened and she returned.
l.He was last in Egypt in 2014 for two weeks when his mother passed away.
m.His wife first came to Australia in January 2013. She returned to Egypt several times to continue to attend the church. She is a servant of church. She served inside the church. She would teach and explain the holy bible and prepare the meals and take the elderly and other servants for trips.
n.His son [Master L] was very young in Egypt so just did simple tasks and attended church services.
o.Other people served in the church. They continue to serve inside the church. They still drive the elderly to church but not like before. He means they are not as efficient as when he served. The service is still there but it is limited because of the problems he was exposed to. It has made the others scared so their activities have decreased. Outside the church service is very limited, but they continue to drive the elderly to church and appointments.
p.The Tribunal asked if the others serving encounter any problems doing that service and the first named applicant responded of course they would but not the sort of problem he was exposed to. They do that service in the areas where there are no problems. They do not go inside the extremist areas. The extremist areas are where the Salafists are dominant and no one can go inside. This is in [Suburb 5]. The applicant would get some people from [Suburb 5] when he served in Alexandria. There are very few Christians in [Suburb 5], the extremists are the majority. The Christians there don’t serve in the church, they only go to church. They don’t preach. They are peaceful. Other Christians there don’t take the elderly to church because they don’t want to be seen by the Salafists taking the elderly to church too. Because they are Salafists they are bothered by Christians serving the elderly and taking them to church. They talk to the neighbours about it. They don’t like that idea.
q.The Salafists are extremists. The applicant had a study colleague who would refuse to shake hands with him and called him a Kafir. Salafists consider Christians are infidels for worshipping other Gods, meaning Jesus. The Salafists are like the Muslim Brotherhood. Burhani is a Salafist on satellite channels and he speaks badly about Christians and calls them infidels. Salafists are worse than Muslim Brotherhood.
r.The first named applicant used to live in the [Suburb 2] area and served in [Church 2]. He would take children to bible studies. Once a Salafist pointed a sharp knife at his side because he was serving in the church. This was in [1994]. The Salafist said you are a kafir, infidel. He used very bad language. He said your church is worshipping another god. He did this because the first named applicant serves. They want the first named applicant to convert to Islam or at least not to serve. They threatened the first named applicant not to come again to take the children from the area, and to stop serving.
s.There was another incident when the first named applicant went out of church. He was hit by a motorcycle. This was before he moved to [Suburb 1], in around [Year]. The person on the motorcycle said you are a kafir and infidel worshiping other Gods not the true God. He was mocking Christianity. He cursed and left.
t.After the threats the first named applicant stopped taking the children to bible studies and moved to [Suburb 1].
u.At the time of the revolution the applicant was guarding his home. He was subjected to attacks on his shop from terrorists. A group of Salafists came with bats and attacked his shop and broke the window glass. They held a special knife and threatened him. The neighbours interfered and saved him. The neighbours were a mix of Muslims and Christians. The shop was at street level in the same building where he lived. There were other shops there but they were not attacked because they were owned by Muslims.
v.He would serve by taking the elderly to activities from areas surrounding the church. Once his car glass broken. In another incident the tyres of his vehicle were punctured and flattened. In another incident someone pointed the special knife at him. In another incident a lady servant went into the building to get an elderly and he was attacked again with the knife.
w.He served in the church and collected the elderly consistently three times a week. The Salafists could see him. Because he took those people to church and appointments they targeted him. The Salafists have beards and no moustaches. He saw them break his car window. He was about 20 metres away from the car and saw them do it. They said their usual talk, ‘infidel / kafir, you worship the wrong God’. He went up to them when they smashed the car window. A Salafist used bad language and held the knife at him and threatened him. This happened in [Suburb 1].
x.He did not see who flattened his car tyres as he was inside a building at the time. He believes it was Salafists because he is targeted. This happened in [Location]. It is a Muslim Brotherhood area.
y.Th third time he was threatened with a knife was when his shop was attacked during the revolution.
z.He continues his service in Australia. At church he prepares the bread for communion, cleans and clears, takes people to church, has conferences with Father [named], takes some elderly with him to look after them, helps organise the church conference, serves in the church library, and visits people who are sick and the elderly in nursing homes.
aa.His son [Mr L] does church service in Australia. [Mr L] does bible studies and service for homeless people. [Mr L] is also a Deacon at church. [Mr L] does scout service for three churches.

The following is a summary of the information provided by the second named applicant at the hearing:
a.She does church service at an individual level in Australia. For example she helps elderly women with food and cooking. The church Father also asks her to give attention and service to particular people.
b.She had mental health difficulties in Egypt because she was assaulted. Since her twenties men on public transport sexually harassed and intimidated her.
c.She graduated from university in Egypt in [Year] with a [Subject 2] Bachelor’s degree. She previously had a Diploma but loved [subject 2] so continued her studies at university. She wanted to get employment in the [subject 2] field but did not get the opportunity. When she applied for jobs employers would take her Muslim friends but not her.
d.The Tribunal asked if she had tried to get employment at a Christian run organisation in Egypt. She responded no because the only Christian she knew who could obtain [subject 2] employment had to go to a place far away to [work]. The second named applicant also became scared to use public transport because of her past experiences so this hindered her ability to find employment.
e.Instead she did voluntary service within the church with young girls who would tell her their problems and considered her like a mother.
f.The Tribunal put to the second named applicant that some country information indicated that the level of harassment of women in Egypt had reduced in recent years and there were no longer women only train carriages. She responded that the authorities cancelled the women only carriage because they did not prevent anything. The harassment is still continuing, especially to Christian women who wear crosses. For Muslim men it is permissible by God to do this to Christian women.
g.The second named applicant is receiving counselling in Australia. It has had a good effect and she has gone back to work. She [job details deleted].
h.In Egypt she would be scared to walk in the street even if someone was with her. When she is in Egypt men come very close to her because she does not cover her head.
i.She doesn’t think she will be able to work in Egypt. She would be scared to even go to church or walk to church after she saw the children lying in the ground in the church bombing. She is scared she will see the same happening to her children.
j.She is scared of crowds and too much noise.
k.She does not know if there is good mental health counselling in Egypt. People in Egypt have negative views about people with mental health difficulties.
Country Information
DFAT’s most recent ‘Country Information Report’ on Egypt, published in June 2019, contains the following:
Christians
Christianity was established in Egypt in the first century and is one of the oldest centres of Christianity in the world. Although there are twelve officially recognised Christian denominations in Egypt (four Orthodox, seven Catholic and one Protestant), the vast majority of Christians in Egypt are members of the Coptic Orthodox Church. All those belonging to recognised Christian denominations are identified as Christian on their national ID cards. While Christians reside throughout the country, they are particularly concentrated in Upper Egypt (the southern part of Egypt) and in major cities such as Cairo and Alexandria. Suburbs in Cairo and other cities and some villages are sometimes regarded or described as ‘Christian areas’, but few are exclusively Christian (or Muslim). Egyptian Christians are politically and socio-economically diverse: they hold varied professions; range from the very poor to the very rich; and have attained a range of education levels.
Christians generally dress similarly to Muslim Egyptians. In urban areas, however, Christian women are more likely than Muslim women to leave their hair uncovered. Christian women living in rural or conservative areas are more likely to cover their hair, but generally do not wear the Islamic hijab. Christians tend to have identifiable names. Some Christians tattoo small crosses on the inside of their wrists or between their thumb and forefinger as a mark of their identity, often following visits to monasteries or holy sites. Not all Christians have these tattoos and it is not a mandatory religious practice.
There are no legal barriers to prevent Christians from being visible in public life, and a number of Christians have become prominent and influential in Egyptian politics and business. DFAT understands that the percentage of Christians in the Egyptian civil service is broadly representative of the religious breakdown of the population. However, Christians tend to be under-represented in senior civil servant roles, and in the upper ranks of the military and security services. It is very rare for Christians to be appointed as presidents, deans or vice-deans in public universities. While anti-discriminatory laws and legal protections exist, these are not always enforced fairly and Christians may experience some discrimination, particularly in rural areas.
Most Christians viewed the post-2011 Revolution ascendency of the Muslim Brotherhood with considerable apprehension. They regarded the Morsi government’s removal and the restoration of general law and order as a cause for relief, and strongly supported the ascendency of Sisi to the presidency. Many Christians and representatives of other minority faiths report that while things could always improve, they generally consider themselves better protected under President Sisi than previous Egyptian leaders. Christian religious authorities have consistently expressed appreciation for Sisi’s public messaging which has called upon Egyptians to place national unity above religious differences, and for his personal example: in 2015, Sisi became the first Egyptian head of state to attend Christmas mass at the St. Mark’s Cathedral in Cairo and has attended every year since. Sisi has actively engaged with the Christian community, declaring days of national mourning or calling personally on Pope Tawadros to express his condolences following terrorist attacks against Christians. Local sources report that Christians generally remain strong supporters of Sisi, although (like other Egyptians) their initial enthusiasm has waned due to the lack of economic improvement and ongoing social difficulties in Egypt.
… DFAT assesses that Christians face a moderate risk of discrimination that is more likely to be societal than official in nature, and is likely to vary considerably according to geographic location. Christians, particularly in rural areas, may face difficulty in obtaining justice through legal means. Despite the lack of any official policy of discrimination, Christians remain less likely than Muslims to be able to achieve senior positions in institutions such as the civil service, military and security services, and universities.
…
Women
Article 11 of the Constitution commits the state to achieving equality between women and men, and to ensuring appropriate representation of women in national bodies. There are considerable legal protections for women in many areas, including on personal safety, participation in the workforce, and mandatory schooling for girls. The government’s National Strategy for the Empowerment of Egyptian Women (2017 – 2030) sets a number of concrete targets for political, economic and social empowerment for 2030, including increasing the percentage of women in public posts from 5 per cent to 17 per cent; reducing the unemployment rate for women from 24 per cent to 16 per cent; and halving the maternal mortality rate (currently 33 women die from pregnancy related causes for every 100,000 live births, compared to 8.5 in Australia). The strategy also aims to eliminate sexual harassment and domestic violence entirely, and to improve Egypt’s ranking on the UN Gender Inequality Index to 88 of 159 selected countries from its 2017 position of 115.
Women participate in all areas of Egyptian society, including government, business and civil society. However, societal, cultural, legislative, and religious barriers continue to place considerable limits on that participation. The implementation of constitutional protections can be unpredictable, and frequently dependent on the individual discretion of police, prosecutors, or judges. Human rights organisations have told DFAT that some judges, particularly in rural areas, allow their religious or cultural view of women to influence their findings. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the judiciary is almost entirely male – only 0.5 per cent of judges are women. The accountability of police is also an issue, both in terms of their capacity to enforce laws preventing violence and harassment of women and as perpetrators of such acts. DFAT understands that police have targeted some women living alone (which is a social taboo in Egypt) for arrest or extortion under Law 10/1961, which prohibits prostitution.
Religiously-based Personal Status Laws tend to disadvantage both Christian and Muslim women. For example, while Muslim men can unilaterally divorce their wives without providing any justification, Muslim women must either forfeit their financial rights by accepting a ‘no-fault’ divorce, or fight a long and costly court battle to prove their husband harmed them. Christian women married to Christian men are only able to access divorce if their husband converts to another religion or is unfaithful, which results in many women being unable to leave abusive relationships. Women are entitled to inherit only half as much as their male relatives. Laws related to adultery are far more severe for women than men. Women have fewer custodial rights than men. If a divorced woman with children decides to remarry she loses custody of her children to the children’s father or his closest female kin, leading most divorced women to elect not to remarry. Abortion is criminalised in all cases. Women may not remove a child from Egypt without the specific permission of the father.
…
Violence against Women
Rape, sexual harassment, and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence are all strongly prevalent in Egypt. A 2017 survey by the Thomson Reuters Foundation found Cairo the world’s most dangerous megacity for women.
Article 267 of the Criminal Code makes rape a crime punishable by death. The legal definitions for rape and sexual assault are weak, however, and rape within marriage is not a crime. Women’s rights activists estimate that tens of thousands of incidents of rape occur annually, very few of which result in conviction. Human rights observers report that authorities generally treat allegations of rape and sexual assault as a ‘social nuisance’ rather than a crime to be prosecuted, and rarely make serious attempts to prosecute those responsible for sex crimes.
Sexual harassment is a frequent occurrence for women across the socio-economic spectrum. A 2013 UN Women study found 99.3 per cent of Egyptian women had experienced sexual harassment, while 91.5 per cent reported experiencing unwanted physical contact. The study found that most sexually assaulted women would not report the crime to the police or tell their families. Those who do make reports sometimes face retaliation from perpetrators or even their own families, who may blame them for provoking the assault or for bringing shame on the family. Sexual harassment was found to be particularly prevalent during mass street celebrations such as religious feasts, or political demonstrations. State officials and members of parliament have sometimes blamed victims of sexual violence because of their “revealing clothing”.
Decree 50/2014 criminalised sexual harassment for the first time, providing for prison sentences of up to five years, and parliament imposed higher penalties for sexual harassment in December 2017, including fines of up to 10,000 Egyptian pounds (about $750 AUD). There have been some instances in which authorities have successfully prosecuted perpetrators of sexual harassment: nine men received lengthy prison sentences in July 2014 for participating in mob sexual assaults, and a man received a five-year sentence in April 2015 for sexually harassing a woman on public transport in Cairo. However, such prosecutions and sentences remain rare. Authorities have instead taken action against individuals and groups who have spoken out on the issue. For example, in May 2018 authorities arrested an activist who had posted a video on Facebook which spoke about the prevalence of sexual harassment and criticised the government’s failure to protect women. In September, a court sentenced the activist to two years’ imprisonment for publishing false news, and fined her EGP10,000 (AUD795) for making public insults. The activist continues to face charges in a separate case of belonging to a terrorist organisation. Human rights observers report that several other women’s’ rights groups and activists also face criminal charges in relation to their activism, with a number of activists subject to travel bans.
… DFAT assesses that the majority of Egyptian women, regardless or religion or socio-economic status, face societal discrimination in that long-standing traditional values and gender roles continue to restrict their participation in the community and the workforce. DFAT assesses that the majority of Egyptian women face a high risk of gender-based violence, including sexual assault and domestic violence. Activists who criticise government failures in relation to gender violence are likely to face arrest and prosecution in relation to their activism.
…
Police
… Professionalism varies across the police. The effectiveness of the police in general is limited by a shortage of equipment, a lack of training, low pay, and poor investigative skills, particularly in relation to investigating cases of sexual assault. In May 2015, the Ministry of Interior commenced a new policing strategy aimed at improving responses to violence against women, including through human rights training and the deployment of more female physicians to hospitals. Human rights groups report, however, that many women will not report crimes due to a lack of trust in the police.
The police do not enjoy the same high public esteem as the Egyptian military. The police’s ability to deal with evidence is widely mistrusted, particularly in relation to politically sensitive cases. Police mistreatment and impunity was a particular focus of protesters in the January 2011 revolution. Calls for investigations into incidents of police brutality remain common. The Ministry of Interior announced in February 2017 the formation of committees to evaluate police officers on ethics, behaviour, and psychological condition; while in March 2017 it signed a joint protocol with the NCHR to train 300 police officers on human rights.
There have been cases of police officers being successfully prosecuted for sexually assaulting or fatally beating detainees. In October 2017, the Court of Cassation confirmed prison sentences for six officers found guilty of beating a detainee to death in a Luxor police station. Human rights observers report, however, that impunity for the police (and other security forces) remains a significant ongoing issue. Authorities do not investigate all complaints of police abuse, and many prosecutions have resulted in acquittals due to insufficient or contradictory evidence.
The Department’s September 2023 COISS thematic report on ‘Coptic Christians’ states:
The perceived relationship between Mubarak and the Coptic Church put Egyptian Christians at risk when he was ousted from power. A general increase in violence, unrest and terrorist attacks followed the 2011 revolution, as well as a significant increase in large-scale anti-Christian violence. Minority Rights Group International reports that in the first two years after Mubarak’s overthrow, nearly 100 Copts died in sectarian attacks, more than the entire previous decade.
Sectarian violence continued after the election as president of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned Mohamed Morsi and intensified with his ousting by the military and subsequent crackdown on his supporters. Copts were seen as supportive of the military’s actions and attacks against Copts escalated, including attacks against priests, abductions, and assaults on churches, houses and shops.
The Sisi government, which came to power after the military coup in 2013, has emphasised internal security and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) states that general law and order has improved. President Sisi has consistently called for Egyptians to place national unity above religious differences and his government has shown significant public support for the Coptic community. In 2015 President Sisi became the first Egyptian President to attend Coptic Christmas Eve Mass, a symbolic gesture that has since become a semi-regular event. Coptic Christians generally remain strong supporters of President Sisi in turn. The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy states that Pope Tawadros II aligned himself with President Sisi even before Morsi’s deposal, ‘and the two share a closer relationship than any pope or president in memory.’ There are claims, however, that President Sisi’s purported support for Copts has not filtered down to a bureaucratic, judicial and local government level or permeated wider society.
…
Religion is not reported in official census data. The Coptic Orthodox Church states that 15 million Egyptians are Coptic Christians (about 15 per cent of the population) while the government’s primary statistical agency puts the total proportion of Christians at just 5.7 per cent. This figure is based on the 1986 census. Independent estimates put Christians at around 10 per cent of Egypt’s population (estimated at 107.8 million) and the majority belong to the Coptic Orthodox Church. A tiny minority of Copts are Coptic Catholics, sharing the Coptic liturgy with the Coptic Orthodox Church while maintaining full communion with the Church of Rome.
Coptic Christians live throughout Egypt with greater numbers found in the urban centres of Cairo and Alexandria, and in Upper Egypt (especially Minya, located approximately 245km south of Cairo). Coptic Christians are not a ‘monolithic’ community – they are politically and socio-economically diverse, with different levels of education, and hold a wide diversity of viewpoints. Minority Rights Group International states that the Coptic Christian community ‘are a significant political force in the country, despite a history of marginalization.’ Not only are Copts the largest minority in the country, they are also the largest non-Muslim population in the Middle East.
…
In 2019 DFAT assessed that most Egyptians, especially those living in urban areas, work, live and socialise together with little regard to each other’s religious identity. Other recent religious freedom and Christian advocacy reports do not provide information to corroborate this, and COISS has not found other sources that confirm this as the ‘lived experience’ generally of religious minorities in Egypt. Christian advocacy group, Open Doors, states that ‘Christians in Egypt report that, although Muslims and Christians have much contact in everyday life, it cannot be called a peaceful co-existence. Open Doors does note that there are less tensions in urban areas and ‘[s]ocietal hostility and prejudice against Christians are more pronounced in the poorer and rural parts of the country.’
Coptic Christians continue to face systematic societal and institutional discrimination. Existing anti-discriminatory laws and legal protections are not always enforced and Coptic Christians can face discrimination in employment, education, professional sports and other areas. Coptic Christians are reportedly under-represented or non-existent in senior roles in the military, intelligence services, police, civil service and universities. USCIRF notes that removing religious affiliation from identity documents, which has been discussed by lawmakers in recent years, would be a step towards addressing religious discrimination.
In positive developments: since the 2014 constitution established a quota, the number of elected Coptic parliamentarians has increased from 5 to 31 in Egypt’s House of Representatives and from 15 to 24 in its Senate, although there is only one Christian in the cabinet. Christians are the governors in two governorates (out of 27) and President Sisi has a number of senior Christian advisors. In February 2022 a Coptic Christian became President of the Supreme Constitutional Court for the first time.
…
Violence
The main forms of violence against Christians are large or small-scale terrorist attacks by Islamic militants; communal mob attacks, mainly in rural areas; and individual attacks.
The Sisi government is waging an ongoing campaign against Islamic militants. The main front for this is the Sinai Peninsula, where Coptic Christians and others have been displaced from their homes. Attacks have also occurred in other areas of Egypt, including Cairo and Alexandria.
Militants carried out a number of terror attacks against Coptic Christians in 2017-2018 and earlier. Following two major attacks (claimed by Islamic State) targeting Palm Sunday church services in the cities of Tanta and Alexandria in 2017, President Sisi declared a state of emergency that remained in place until October 2021.
In February 2018, security forces launched ‘Operation Sinai 2018’ in which they escalated their offensive against Islamic State (IS) aligned militants in the Sinai Peninsula (the Sinai). There have been claims of significant human rights abuses under Operation Sinai and it has led to mass displacement of civilians in the area. The government and supporters claim that the operation has significantly reduced the frequency and scale of militant attacks. According to the latest United Nations Security Council (UNSC) report on the threat posed by IS, counter-terrorism efforts have successfully reduced the leadership and numbers of the IS affiliate in Sinai, containing it locally and rendering it unable to undertake high profile attacks in Egypt. However, IS does remain active in the Sinai. The latest US Department of State human rights report states that ‘ISIS-Sinai Province claimed 101 attacks in the Sinai region resulting in 206 casualties in 2021’. In April 2021 IS released a video showing the execution of a Coptic man who had been kidnapped three months earlier in North Sinai. In the video they stated it was in retaliation for Christian support for the Egyptian army and pledged to kill more Copts. In August 2022 two Coptic farmers were reportedly killed by IS in Sinai. There have been no largescale attacks against Coptic Christians since 2018. Security forces have reportedly thwarted a number of attempted attacks, including a planned April 2020 attack on Easter services in Cairo.
Violence against Coptic Christians is often fuelled by rumour and social media. Church building, expansion and/or registration is a very sensitive sectarian issue in Egypt and is one of the main triggers of communal violence at a local level. Other issues such as interfaith relationships, conversions and blasphemy accusations can lead to communal violence, as can small-scale disputes or neighbourhood disagreements that take on a sectarian dimension.
The majority of communal violence incidents take place in Upper Egypt, particularly the province of Minya. Minya has a significant and assertive Coptic population (around 40 per cent), a high concentration of Islamists, high rate of poverty and low rate of education. In an effort to address underlying causes of sectarian tensions, a number of religious tolerance programs have recently been implemented in Minya.
In November 2021 USCIRF stated that anti-Christian mob attacks in rural areas, as well as sectarian or religiously motivated attacks, had ‘significantly declined over the last two years’. USCIRF notes that it is difficult to account for this trend, with the pandemic likely playing a role. Open Doors also noted that there was less reported violence in 2021, and also attributes this to the pandemic. Open Doors notes a further drop in violence in its 2023 World Watch List while still emphasising that ‘at least 5 Christians were killed and more than 20 attacked’ (over the reporting period from October 2021 to September 2022). Conversely, USCIRF states that reports ‘of individual violent assaults against Copts increased’ in 2022.
Communal violence is reportedly less common in urban areas, due to the visible presence of security forces. DFAT states that the ‘number and scale of violent incidents against Copts has decreased notably since around 2018 and remained low, as security forces have been active in stopping all forms of mobilisation and violence, including communal violence.’ Nevertheless, individual attacks still occur. Christian advocacy group, International Christian Concern (ICC), states that there are increased incidents during Easter and Ramadan. The most widely reported recent incident to date was the murder of a Coptic priest in April 2022. Father Arsanios Wadeed was stabbed in the street in Alexandria. His attacker was arrested and charged and was sentenced to death in June 2022. USCIRF also details a number of other individual attacks on Coptic Christians in 2022.
Christian advocacy groups claim that individual attackers of Christians are often dismissed as mentally unstable, including those responsible for attempted homicides and repeat offenders. However, Coptic newspaper, Watani, states that in recent years ‘such allegations have been refuted through medical examination and observation at a public hospital, as ordered by the prosecution.’
It should also be noted that sources indicate Coptic women are especially vulnerable to street harassment and violence as they do not veil themselves.
…
State protection
The situation for Coptic Christians has generally improved under the Sisi government. USCIRF downgraded Egypt to its recommended “Special Watch List” category in 2017 after 6 years (2011-2016) as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC). The Special Watch List includes countries whose governments tolerate or engage in severe religious freedom violations, but do not rise to the CPC standard of ‘systematic, ongoing, and egregious.’ Egypt’s position improved from 16 in 2021 to 20 in 2022 and to 35 in 2023 in the Open Doors' World Watch List, a ranking of 50 countries where it is most difficult to be a Christian (with number one being the most difficult). In the 2022 World Watch List Open Doors stated that the improved score was caused mainly by less reported violence, although this was likely the result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
While noting that violence had again dropped, Open Doors does not give any other explanation for the substantially improved ranking in the 2023 list.
In January 2021 Pope Tawadros II rejected labelling Coptic Christians in Egypt as a ‘persecuted minority’, stating that this provides ‘a distorted image of the situation in Egypt’. While emphasising that Copts in Egypt face difficulties linked to sectarian violence and discrimination, Pope Tawadros II stated that this does ‘not constitute a condition of systematic religious persecution.’
Gauging the general level of state protection available to Copts in Egypt is difficult. The official message of the Coptic Orthodox Church under Pope Tawadros II praises the Sisi government for its protection of the community. The government suppresses any criticism of their ability or efforts to protect Copts. There are offences in the penal code under which those reporting on religious/minority issues may be penalised, including Article 98. Clergy may be penalised for criticising the government under Article 201. Coptic advocates who have highlighted discrimination and violence against Copts have been arrested and imprisoned.
The government has engaged in a number of symbolic gestures such as establishing a committee to address sectarian violence and public pronouncements by President Sisi calling for national unity. In September 2021 the Egyptian government released its National Human Rights Strategy which commits Egypt to a five year program of human rights reform. The document sets out national goals and planned programs promoting religious tolerance and anti-sectarianism within educational, religious, and community institutions. The strategy has been praised by the United States, the UN Human Rights Council and Coptic organisations within Egypt. Others, including Coptic diaspora advocacy groups, have dismissed it as ‘pure PR and propaganda.’ Analysts agree, however, that the Sisi administration places heavy emphasis on internal security. Pronouncements in support of national unity and strategies to reduce interfaith tension and sectarian violence are one aspect of this (while cracking down on minority rights activists is another).
Security is increased around churches and monasteries during Christian holy days and security forces have reportedly thwarted a number of terrorist attacks. In April 2020 security forces fought against militants who were reportedly planning to attack Cairo Easter services.
Societal discrimination may impact on the level of protection local authorities and security officials offer Copts. DFAT assesses Egyptian authorities are generally committed to preventing communal violence, but this commitment may vary between individuals and locations. Church officials have questioned the commitment of some local officials and law enforcement to upholding the law equally for Christians and Muslims. In 2020 ICC noted there was a greater police presence on the streets and this had deterred mob attacks, but also increased fear of state monitoring.
There are widespread claims that the Sisi government’s purported support for Copts has not filtered down to the bureaucratic, judicial and local government level. Human rights and religious freedom reports concur that there is a culture of impunity around mob violence against Copts committed by ‘ordinary’ Egyptian’ citizens.
However, in November 2021 USCIRF stated Egyptian prosecutors have shown greater willingness to hold accountable those who carry out individual, religiously motivated attacks, particularly if those attacks result in casualties.
One of the main issues at a societal level is that incidents of communal violence are frequently ‘resolved’ by customary reconciliation. Customary reconciliation is a form of dispute settlement that predates Egypt’s modern legal systems. It is recognised in the law ‘in instances that do not involve serious crimes (i.e. homicide, serious injury, or theft).’ Human rights groups and Christian advocacy groups say that this practice effectively precludes legal accountability for such incidents of communal violence, as victims are regularly pressured to retract their statements and deny facts, leading to the dropping of charges in some cases. Police forces may pressure Copts to take part in reconciliation sessions by arresting members of both sides, including those targeted in the attack. Christian advocacy groups report cases in which local disputes take on a sectarian bent and harassment continues after customary reconciliation, resulting in Christians choosing to relocate from their home village.
Despite their dependence on the state security apparatus for safety, Copts are proportionally under-represented in the security forces and are reportedly non-existent in the intelligence branches or senior levels of the security forces. The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights notes that the ‘securitisation’ of sectarian issues as a default by the state does not adequately address the underlying causes and may in itself contribute to prejudices against Christians. DFAT notes that there has been a significant decrease in sectarian violence, but that their contacts had indicated that this ‘was due to the heavy-handed security approach, and had not solved the root of the problem. Further, sectarian hate speech and abuse which previously occurred in person was now occurring on social media.
Information on the legal system more generally indicates that the constitution provides for an independent judiciary. The US Department of State reports that the law provides the right to a fair and public trial, but the judiciary often failed to uphold this right. DFAT states that the quality and impartiality of individual judges may vary, particularly at more junior levels and that ‘individual judges can be subjected to community pressure to rule in accordance with dominant social and political norms, particularly in cases where religion is a factor.’ USCIRF also notes that Egypt’s constitution states that the principles of sharia are the principle source of legislation. Within this framework, ‘the country’s security forces, prosecutors, and courts’ tend to act of their own independent volition as ‘guardians of the established social and political public order’.
The 2023 USDOS Country Human Rights Report on Egypt states:
Women
Rape and Domestic Violence: … Civil society organizations reported instances of police pressuring rape and domestic violence survivors not to pursue charges. According to media reports in November citing statistics from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics, eight million women and girls were subjected to some form of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse annually.
… A local rights organization reported 471 incidents of violence against women in the first half of the year, including 158 homicides and 239 domestic violence incidents. The Ministry of Interior included a unit responsible for combating sexual and gender-based violence. The NCW was responsible for coordinating government and civil society efforts to empower women.
…
Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: … The government took steps to prevent sexual harassment, including increasing prison terms and fines for those convicted and defining aggravated harassment categories for perpetrators using a weapon or in the workplace. Despite these efforts, sexual harassment was a serious problem. An April report by the UN Human Rights Committee registered concern that heightened sentences for sexual harassment had not reduced its prevalence, reporting rates regarding violence against women had not increased, and women who pursued complaints through the courts were often revictimized by intrusive and negative media attention, intimidation by defendants and the prosecution, and drawn-out investigations.
Discrimination: The constitution committed to “achieving equality between women and men in all civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.” While the government took some steps to improve their situation, women did not enjoy the same legal rights and opportunities as men, and discrimination was widespread. Aspects of the law and traditional societal practices disadvantaged women in family, social, and economic life.
Women faced widespread societal discrimination, threats to their physical security, and workplace bias in favor of men, hindering their social and economic advancement.
Laws affecting marriage and personal status generally corresponded to an individual’s religious group. … The Coptic Orthodox Church permitted divorce only in rare circumstances, such as adultery or conversion of one spouse to another religion. Other Christian churches permitted divorce on a case-by-case basis.
The law followed sharia in matters of inheritance, meaning a Muslim woman generally received one-half the amount of a man’s inheritance, and Christian widows of Muslim men had no inheritance rights. A sole Muslim woman heir received one-half her parents’ estate, with the balance going to the siblings of the parents or the children of the siblings if the siblings were deceased. A sole man heir inherited his parents’ entire estate.
In marriage and divorce cases, a woman usually had to convey her testimony through an adult man relative or representative for the court to admit it as credible. The law assumed a man’s testimony was credible unless proven otherwise.

The 2024 USCIRF report, in its section on Egypt, states:
In 2023, religious freedom conditions in Egypt remained consistent with past years. The government gave selective attention to religious diversity and tolerance, but freedom of religion or belief throughout the country did not substantially increase.
… The Ministry of Education announced a new ban on Muslim female pupils wearing the niqab, or religious face veil, in classrooms during the 2023–2024 academic year.
In May and June, a Cabinet-appointed committee approved two larger-than-average batches of church legalization permits pursuant to the 2016 Church Construction Law. While the law has created a legal pathway for Christian worship sites to achieve status as churches, it has reinforced an inherently discriminatory system, with separate requirements for Christians and no application eligibility at all for other religious minorities, such as Baha’is and Shi’a Muslims.
Further, some local communities continued to respond with violence to Christian congregations’ submission of applications to repair or build churches. For example, in September, villagers looted and set fire to a residential construction site for Copts in Abu-Qurqas, Minya, and in December, rioters in Samalout, Minya, violently attacked Copts attempting to construct a church under a new legal permit. While larger-scale violent attacks on religious minorities, especially Copts, did not return to previously high levels, individual incidences of anti-Coptic violence—such as physical attacks on Copts in the workplace—persisted.
Against the backdrop of Egypt’s intensifying economic crisis, community liaisons in rural Upper Egypt described an increase in exploitation of women based on their religion, such as lenders pressuring resource-limited Christian widows to convert to Islam in exchange for debt forgiveness. In January 2023, vandals defaced mosaics of the baby Jesus, Virgin Mary, and Saint Joseph at the Convent of the Holy Virgin in Assiut, following the governorate’s recent restoration of the site to promote tourism.
The UK Home Office’s December 2023 CPIN report, ‘Egypt: Christians’, states:
… Quoting from correspondence between the IRBC’s Research Directorate and a Trinity Western University professor, the 2022 IRBC response reported, ‘The Professor stated that the security situation in Egypt “improved” for Coptic Christians between 2020 and 2022; with the government having “driv[en] Islamist movements into exile or underground,” sectarian violence is “not common,” though it still occurs in a “restrained” but “unpredictabl[e]” manner, particularly on Coptic religious holidays such as Coptic Christmas or Easter.
…
Employment
The 2022 USSD religious freedoms report stated: ‘Religious discrimination in private sector hiring continued, according to human rights groups and religious communities…’
Quoting a Canadian professor and a postdoctoral research associate whose respective work focused on Copts, the 2022 IRBC response stated:
'The Professor, in discussing access to employment and other services in Cairo and Alexandria, stated that, compared to those in rural areas, Coptic Christians living in larger cities experience “greater general discrimination” in employment and noted that they will face “significant challenges” in seeking employment if they lack local contacts in the city (Professor 1 Apr. 2022). The Postdoctoral Research Associate stated that in Cairo and Alexandria employment is “typically” accessed through family connections rather than state-sponsored services and that Copts from Upper Egypt resettling in either city without an existing network of relatives would find it “near impossible” to obtain employment (Postdoctoral Research Associate 11 Apr. 2022). The same source added that “most” industries operating in Cairo and Alexandria, including construction, petroleum, public school teaching and the public sector, either refuse to hire Coptic Christians or avoid promoting them; in “most cases,” it is Copts who employ other Copts (Postdoctoral Research Associate 11 Apr. 2022). The Professor similarly noted that Coptic Christians are “most likely” to work for other Copts, as sectarian identity affects employment access (Professor 1 Apr. 2022).’
The January 2024 Open Doors, World Watch Research report, ‘WWL Egypt: Full Country Dossier’, states:
Christians in Egypt report that freedom of religion violations occur mostly at the community level, with many Christians regularly facing discrimination. In addition, incidents take place such as Christian women being harassed in the street (especially in rural areas), Christian children being bullied at state schools or in rare incidents, Muslim mobs forcing Christians to leave their homes after an alleged blasphemy accusation. These sort of incidents take place mostly in Upper Egypt, where Salafist movements are active in the rural communities. The Islamic Salafi al-Nour party continues to exist and operate legally, although the Constitution prohibits religious parties (Art. 74). Their influence is considerable in rural societies where there is a high percentage of illiteracy and poverty.
… President al-Sisi regularly speaks positively about Egypt's Christian community and continues in efforts to create one Egyptian identity, which includes both Muslims and Christians. However, the lack of serious law enforcement and the unwillingness of local authorities to protect Christians leave them vulnerable to attacks, especially in Upper Egypt. In addition, due to the authoritarian nature of government administration, it is futile for church leaders or other Christians to speak out against these practices.
Furthermore, in clear contrast to how mosques are dealt with, the building of new churches is restricted. Despite promises from the president that a church will be built in every new neighborhood and despite the fact that an increasing number of churches are being legalized through official registration, Christians of all backgrounds face difficulties when trying to find (new) places for holding worship.
Communal hostility and mob violence, in particular, continue to cause difficulties.
…
During the WWL 2024 reporting period [1 October 2022 - 30 September 2023], no major violent attack was carried out by Islamic militants targeting the Christian Coptic community.
…
General security has improved under President al-Sisi. No large-scale terror attacks have taken place since 2018. Nonetheless, (sexual) harassment of women remains common. Despite the president's inclusive rhetoric, sectarian violence and religious discrimination remain problematic, especially in upper Egypt, in rural areas and in economically disadvantaged urban areas. It is likely that traditional reconciliation councils, which are prone to injustice, will continue to be used. In addition, al-Sisi's ongoing crackdown on any dissent or criticism, including human rights activism by human rights defenders such as (now released) Coptic activists Ramy Kamel and Patrick George Zaki, will continue to make it difficult for churches and Christians to speak up for themselves and address injustices. Hence, the non-violent forms of rights violations that are prevalent in various spheres of life are likely to continue without much change for the better.
…
Islamic society in Upper Egypt, the southern part of the country, is known to be more conservative and radical than the north. Most incidents and mob attacks take place in this region, with the Minya Governate being the most notorious and having the highest number of attacks on Christians per capita.
However, Christians in the economically disadvantaged rural areas in the north experience a similar degree of oppression by radical Muslims, especially in the Nile Delta villages and towns. Radical Islamic groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood have nationwide support, but in recent years violent Islamic militants have only been openly active in the north-eastern area of the Sinai peninsula. In April 2021, a video appeared of the execution of Nabil Habashy Salama, a Christian from north-Sinai who had previously been abducted by the Islamic State group. In August 2022, a Coptic father and son were found murdered in the same area; it is assumed that they were also victims of IS-related militants. At the end of February 2023, President al-Sisi claimed that terrorism had been defeated in the Sinai region (Ahram Online, 2 March 2023).
…
In Egypt, Islamic oppression operates in different ways. Islamic culture sustains a view in Egyptian society whereby Christians are regarded as second-class citizens. This view causes the discrimination of Christians in the political realm and their dealing with the state. It also creates an environment in which the state is reluctant to respect and enforce the fundamental rights of Christians. In families, converts to Christianity face great pressure to renounce their faith. Christians also face pressure from Islamic oppression in their daily lives in their local neighborhood or at work. There have also been several violent attacks perpetrated by militant Islamic groups targeting Christians in the past decade, although in the last five years attacks were mainly conducted by individual radical Muslims targeting individual Christians. The activity of militant groups in north-eastern Sinai, the last stronghold, has been subdued.
…
Monitoring occurs at different levels. Local communities and Islamist groups know where the Christians live in their neighborhood or villages. They watch and observe them, making sure the Christians do not disrespect Islamic principles by evangelizing or causing problems in others ways. This tension is less in urban places, but remains a problem in poor neighborhoods and rural areas, especially in upper Egypt. In recent years, several Christians have been attacked after allegedly insulting Islam or allegedly having a relationship with a Muslim woman. Police presence and government control is less strict in poor and/or rural areas and mob attacks often go unpunished. At the state level, security and intelligence agencies spy on converts and try to force them to supply information on the activities of convert groups. They also regularly detain converts to force them to stay silent about their new faith and stop all involvement with other converts.
…
This discrimination occurs at different levels. Christians are not employed within the intelligence agencies, and cannot be promoted to senior positions within the army or police force. Christians are also underrepresented in senior government positions. Job discrimination in private employment depends on the level of tolerance of the employer, but happens regularly. Such discrimination has led to a high level of entrepreneurial activity among Copts and other Christians, since they cannot rely on the state or even private (non-Christian) employers for employment. Finally, although constituting a sizable percentage of the population, there has not been a single Christian player in Egypt's national team in a decade, and Christians are discriminated against and denied opportunities to play in the top professional football clubs in the country.
… Christians face discrimination and hostility at times. Civil servants are sometimes unwilling to accept Christians as peers with the same rights and guarantees of safety. Although all women in Egypt experience some forms of (sexual) harassment, Christian women are particularly vulnerable because they do not veil themselves. Levels of pressure and discrimination vary; there is often less pressure in urban areas compared to rural areas.
… Egypt's society is generally Islamic and conservative, although changing attitudes are visible in urbanized areas. Converts have to keep their faith hidden when participating in society and, especially during religious festivals like Ramadan, have to adhere to Islamic religious norms. Christians belonging to the Historical communities at times experience discrimination in both communal life and education, depending on the area where they are living. Examples of incidents are: Receiving lower grades, exclusion from university forums in upper Egypt, being forced to memorize Quran verses, insulting songs being sung and Christian children being bullied. This can make them feel they are 'second-class citizens'.
…
In the WWL 2024 reporting period:
• Christians killed: No major terrorist attack happened during WWL 2024, although at least three Christians have been killed (see Specific examples of violations of rights above for more information).
• Christians attacked: At least 44 Christians have been attacked and sometimes severely injured because of their faith. Several Christians have been injured during mob attacks on them and their properties or the local church. Several converts from Islam to Christianity have also been beaten and mistreated because of their conversion, while some female converts from Islam to Christianity have been forced to marry Muslims. In addition, at least several young women are expected to have faced sexual abuse, while hundreds have experienced sexual harassment. According to some reports, some Christian girls were targeted in a systematic way, with their attackers at times being paid per victim.
… Police response to incidents of violence against Christians has been often complicit or apathetic and in cases of abduction, many women remain missing. In January 2023, three men were acquitted of attacking, beating and stripping an elderly Christian woman in an appeal verdict. Initial reports also indicated that five houses were completely burned down and destroyed in the attack. The consequential message following such gender-based and discriminatory practices against the Christian community indicate that religion-related impunity remains entrenched, even in the Egypt’s highest court (CSW, 17 January 2023).
The psychological toll of such violence and associated impunity is high, and many women live in fear, especially in rural areas. They feel as though they cannot leave the house by themselves and at times they will ask for male company for protection. There are also reports that Christian girls are lured into marriage; these girls are often under-age and come from vulnerable families, often from situations of domestic abuse.
… Church leaders – most of whom are male – are particularly vulnerable to rights violations, in part as they are often easily identifiable as Christians. Whilst uncommon, the killing of clergy does occur; for instance, in April 2022 when an Orthodox priest in Alexandria was stabbed to death (La Croix International, 11 April 2022). But even the more common harassment of church leaders and their families has evoked feelings of fear and helplessness in the Christian community and has been a factor in emigration spikes. Those who speak out against injustices are also targeted. There are several cases in the past few years where Christian men have been attacked and murdered by men influenced by radical Islamic teaching.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
The applicants submitted their Egyptian passports. On the basis of these documents and the applicants’ oral evidence the Tribunal is satisfied they are each a citizen of Egypt. The Tribunal assesses their claims against Egypt as their country of nationality and receiving country.
The applicants claim to fear serious harm in Egypt for reason of their religion as Coptic Christians. The second named applicant additionally claims to fear serious harm in Egypt as a Coptic woman.
Credibility
Coptic Christians
The applicants have consistently maintained that they belong to the Coptic Christian church and are active members of the Coptic Christian communities in both Egypt and Australia. They have provided supporting documents from the Church in Egypt and in Australia which show that they are Coptic Christians. They have also provided photographs and church literature in support of their claims.
The Tribunal accepts that the applicants are Coptic Christians, that the first named applicant serves in and is a Deacon of the Church, and that the second named applicant actively serves in the Church.
First named applicant – attacks and mistreatment in Egypt
The first named applicant claims to have been bullied, ridiculed and punished at school and during his military service because he is Coptic Christian; and to have suffered several attacks in Alexandria because he actively serves in the Coptic Church.
The first named applicant provided clear and simple details about the claimed mistreatment, discrimination, threats and attacks he experienced in Egypt. He was readily able to provide further information about claimed events when asked to at hearing. His claimed experiences are also consistent with the available country information which details the situation for Coptic Christians in Egypt.
His evidence has been largely consistent during the lengthy process of his visa and review applications. He did not appear to try to exaggerate the situation of sectarian conflict in Egypt, acknowledging that there were Muslims in his neighbourhood who supported and tried to protect him against anti-Christian rioters during the revolution. He explained it was extremist and Salafist elements within the Muslim community who would target and intimidate him and his family.
He described how he became known in neighbourhoods for his service in the Coptic church and it was this which drew particular ire from local Salafists and extremists who would occasionally damage his vehicle, threaten and assault him.
The Tribunal found the applicant’s evidence persuasive and it accepts that he did experience discrimination, ridicule, punishment, harassment, attacks on his car, and armed threats in Egypt because he is active in the Coptic Church. The Tribunal accepts that at times he had to move his residence and change his religious service in response to the threats and harm he experienced.
Second named applicant – harassment and mistreatment in Egypt
The second named applicant claims she suffered discrimination and humiliation and was penalised academically during her tertiary studies, because she is Coptic Christian. She claims she faced sexual harassment and sexual assault on public transport in Egypt. She claims when working in her family shop in Alexandria she was threatened and intimidated by local Muslims. She claims she was not able to obtain employment in the area of her university qualification because of discrimination against Coptic Christians. She also claimed her sons were mistreated and discriminated against in schools in Alexandria because the family is Coptic Christian. She claims she was present at the Alexandria cathedral in 2017 during a bombing in which Coptic Christians, including children, were killed and injured.
The second named applicant provided a detailed written statement regarding these experiences. She also spoke about them spontaneously and consistently during her Tribunal hearing. Her account also accords with available country information about discrimination in the education system and discrimination in employment, affecting Coptic Christians in Egypt. Her descriptions of the sexual harassment and assaults she faced on public transport in Egypt were personalised and emotive, particularly when she spoke of their adverse emotional impact upon her mental health. The available information about the high level of verbal and physical harassment of women in public in Egypt is also consistent with her claims. The Tribunal accepts the first named applicant’s account of her experiences as a Coptic Christian and a woman in Egypt.
There are numerous media and human rights reports about the Palm Sunday bombing of the Coptic Christian cathedral in Alexandria in 2017 when the Coptic Pope was giving mass. The Tribunal notes that the second named applicant was in Egypt at the time and accepts she was present during the bombing.
Fear of Harm in Egypt
First named applicant

The available country information shows that physical attacks upon Coptic Christians have lessened in recent years, particularly following the Egyptian military’s effectiveness in combatting the operations of the Islamic State. According to the country information individual assaults occur randomly and sporadically. Communal targeting which can happen from time to time largely takes place in southern Egypt in the Upper Egypt region.
The available country information notes that Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood maintain a significant presence in Egypt.
The Tribunal accepts that the first named applicant is committed to actively serving in the Coptic Church and that he has a formal role as a Deacon in the church. The Tribunal accepts that if he returns to Egypt he would wish and endeavour to continue his active service and his role as Deacon. Available information[1] shows that Deacons in the Coptic Church wear distinctive robes in church so that he would be easily identifiable as having a prominent and public active role in the church.
[1] See for example: Celebrating in sacred attire - Features - Al-Ahram Weekly - Ahram Online ; Deacon Stoles — Shop — St. Christopher Orthodox Store.
Given the above the Tribunal accepts that the first named applicant would again have a profile as a Coptic Christian which could readily attract adverse attention from Salafists or Muslim Brotherhood members who do not want active Christians in their neighbourhoods. This occurred in the past and it is likely that he would be remembered by at least some of those who have previously targeted him.
As canvassed with the first named applicant there are Coptic Christians at his church who continue to serve without being targeted by fundamentalists. However as explained by the first named applicant they can do so only by being careful how and where they serve, so as not to attract attention and provoke an adverse reaction. In contrast the Tribunal accepts that the first named applicant has a known and adverse profile amongst local Salafists and/or Muslim Brotherhood members who have targeted him in the past and who would likely be prone to doing so again if he attracts their attention.
Despite the decrease in incidents of targeting of Coptic Christians, particularly in northern Egypt, the Tribunal considers there is a real chance that the first named applicant’s active Christian service in local neighbourhoods would again render him vulnerable to targeted harassment, threats, attacks on his property and vehicles, and even physical assault, perpetrated by a very small minority of the Muslim community who are intolerant to public Christian activity and who react with verbal and physical aggression. In view of the current environment in Egypt the Tribunal acknowledges that the chance of these harms occurring is not high. However given that radical, extremist and fundamentalist elements still exist and operate in Egypt the Tribunal considers the chance of serious harm to the first named applicant is real and not remote. This is particularly so in that the available country information shows a pattern of Christians being increasingly targeted at times of political volatility, which may occur in the reasonably foreseeable future as Egypt has not yet reached a stage of durable political and religious stability.
The Tribunal considers that the identified harms and the threat of these harms amount to serious harm for the essential and significant reason of the first named applicant’s religion.
The Tribunal notes that the current Egyptian government has taken positive and constructive steps to combat religious intolerance and violence. However the reported country information highlights that this has not filtered down to all levels of government and that the police cannot be confidently relied upon to assist or protect Coptic Christians when they are targeted. The Tribunal is therefore not satisfied there is effective protection available to the first named applicant in Egypt.
Given that the first named applicant is committed to active public service and has an identifiable role as Deacon, the Tribunal is satisfied that risk of harm to him exists in all areas of Egypt.
The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that the first named applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution in Egypt for reason of his religion.
Second named applicant
The second named applicant has experienced past discrimination in her attempts to obtain employment in her field of qualification. According to the available country information Coptic Christians continue to face substantial obstacles gaining employment in both the government and private sectors. If she returns to Egypt there is no indication that the second named applicant would find any greater degree of success obtaining [work]. The Tribunal considers there is a real chance that she will not be able to obtain employment in the field of her qualification because she is Coptic Christian.
The available country information indicates that women in Egypt continue to face frequent and serious levels of verbal and physical sexual harassment and abuse in public. The second named applicant gave evidence that as a Coptic woman she is especially targeted for harassment and abuse by men who consider Coptic women suitable for and deserving of such treatment. The Tribunal accepts that as a Coptic woman, her lack of head covering and display of a crucifix does make her more vulnerable to harassment and abuse in public in Egypt. The Tribunal is satisfied there is a real chance the second named applicant will again be subjected to verbal and physical sexual harassment, intimidation and abuse in public if she returns to Egypt.
On the basis of her evidence and the supporting country information the Tribunal does not consider the physical and verbal harassment and abuse she is at risk of to be low-level or not serious. It includes actual sexual assault and a threatening and intimidating environment which places an unrealistic burden upon women to avoid public and work situations where they may be at risk. As she and others have stated it leads to them seriously restricting their movements and activities so as to avoid public transport and other public activity.
The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that the employment discrimination and the sexual harassment and abuse amount to serious harm. The Tribunal considers that the real chance of serious harm is for the essential and significant reasons of the second named applicant’s Coptic Christian religion and her gender as a woman.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the risk of serious harm to the second named applicant exists in all areas of Egypt.
Based upon the available country information the Tribunal is not satisfied there is effective protection available to the second named applicant in Egypt.
Given the above the Tribunal is satisfied that the second named applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution in Egypt for the essential and significant reasons of her religion and her membership of the particular social groups namely women in Egypt.
Third named applicant
The third named applicant did not raise any individual claims. However, the Tribunal is satisfied that he is the dependent child of the first and second named applicants and is a member of their family unit for the purposes of s 36(2)(b)(i).
Section 36(3)
Subsection 36(3) of the Act has the effect that where a non-citizen in Australia has a right to enter and reside in a third country, Australia will not have protection obligations in respect of that person if he or she has not availed himself or herself of that right unless the conditions prescribed in either s 36(4), (5) or (5A) are satisfied, in which case the s 36(3) exclusion will not apply. The conditions prescribed in s 36(4), (5) or (5A) will be met where a person has a well-founded fear of being persecuted or faces a real risk of significant harm in that country, or has a well-founded fear of refoulement from that country to a place where they face such treatment.
There is no evidence or indication before the Tribunal that any of the applicants have a right to enter and reside in any other country. On the basis of the information before it the Tribunal is satisfied they do not have such a right and that they are therefore not excluded from Australia’s protection obligations by s 36(3).
Conclusions
For the reasons given above the Tribunal is satisfied that the first named applicant and the second named applicant are persons in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations and who satisfy the criterion set out in s 36(2)(a).
The Tribunal is not satisfied that the third named applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations for the purposes of s 36(2)(a) or (aa). However, the Tribunal is satisfied that he is the dependent child of the first and second named applicants and is a member of the same family unit as the first named applicant and the second named applicant for the purposes of s 36(2)(b)(i). As such, the fate of his application depends on the outcome of the application of the first named applicant and/or the second named applicant. It follows that the third named applicant will be entitled to a protection visa provided the criterion in s 36(2)(b)(ii) and the remaining criteria for the visa are met.
DECISION
The Tribunal sets aside and remits the application for a protection visa for reconsideration, in accordance with the order:
· that the first named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act; and
· that the second named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act; and
· that the third named applicant satisfies s 36(2)(b)(i) of the Migration Act, on the basis of membership of the same family unit as the first named applicant.
Melissa McAdam
Member

Dates of hearings:   13 August 2024; 23 September 2024
Representative for the Applicant:       Mrs Lidia Soliman
ATTACHMENT - Extract from Migration Act 1958
5 (1) Interpretation
…
cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment means an act or omission by which:
(a)     severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person; or
(b)     pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person so long as, in all the circumstances, the act or omission could reasonably be regarded as cruel or inhuman in nature;
but does not include an act or omission:
(c)     that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or
(d)     arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.
…
degrading treatment or punishment means an act or omission that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation which is unreasonable, but does not include an act or omission:
(a)     that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or
(b)     that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.
…
torture means an act or omission by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person:
(a)     for the purpose of obtaining from the person or from a third person information or a confession; or
(b)     for the purpose of punishing the person for an act which that person or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed; or
(c)     for the purpose of intimidating or coercing the person or a third person; or
(d)     for a purpose related to a purpose mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or (c); or
(e)     for any reason based on discrimination that is inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant;
but does not include an act or omission arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.
…
receiving country, in relation to a non-citizen, means:
(a)     a country of which the non-citizen is a national, to be determined solely by reference to the law of the relevant country; or
(b)     if the non-citizen has no country of nationality—a country of his or her former habitual residence, regardless of whether it would be possible to return the non-citizen to the country.
…
5H    Meaning of refugee
(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person in Australia, the person is a refugee if the person is:
(a)     in a case where the person has a nationality – is outside the country of his or her nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country; or
(b)     in a case where the person does not have a nationality – is outside the country of his or her former habitual residence and owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to return to it.
Note:     For the meaning of well-founded fear of persecution, see section 5J.
…
5J     Meaning of well-founded fear of persecution
(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person has a well-founded fear of persecution if:
(a)     the person fears being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion; and
(b)     there is a real chance that, if the person returned to the receiving country, the person would be persecuted for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (a); and
(c)     the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of a receiving country.
Note:     For membership of a particular social group, see sections 5K and 5L.
(2)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country.
Note:     For effective protection measures, see section 5LA.
(3)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if the person could take reasonable steps to modify his or her behaviour so as to avoid a real chance of persecution in a receiving country, other than a modification that would:
(a)     conflict with a characteristic that is fundamental to the person’s identity or conscience; or
(b)     conceal an innate or immutable characteristic of the person; or
(c)     without limiting paragraph (a) or (b), require the person to do any of the following:
(i)alter his or her religious beliefs, including by renouncing a religious conversion, or conceal his or her true religious beliefs, or cease to be involved in the practice of his or her faith;
(ii)conceal his or her true race, ethnicity, nationality or country of origin;
(iii)alter his or her political beliefs or conceal his or her true political beliefs;
(iv)conceal a physical, psychological or intellectual disability;
(v)enter into or remain in a marriage to which that person is opposed, or accept the forced marriage of a child;
(vi)alter his or her sexual orientation or gender identity or conceal his or her true sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status.
(4)If a person fears persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a):
(a)     that reason must be the essential and significant reason, or those reasons must be the essential and significant reasons, for the persecution; and
(b)     the persecution must involve serious harm to the person; and
(c)     the persecution must involve systematic and discriminatory conduct.
(5)Without limiting what is serious harm for the purposes of paragraph (4)(b), the following are instances of serious harm for the purposes of that paragraph:
(a)     a threat to the person’s life or liberty;
(b)     significant physical harassment of the person;
(c)     significant physical ill‑treatment of the person;
(d)     significant economic hardship that threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;
(e)     denial of access to basic services, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;
(f)     denial of capacity to earn a livelihood of any kind, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist.
(6)In determining whether the person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), any conduct engaged in by the person in Australia is to be disregarded unless the person satisfies the Minister that the person engaged in the conduct otherwise than for the purpose of strengthening the person’s claim to be a refugee.
5K    Membership of a particular social group consisting of family
For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person (the first person), in determining whether the first person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for the reason of membership of a particular social group that consists of the first person’s family:
(a)     disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced, where the reason for the fear or persecution is not a reason mentioned in paragraph 5J(1)(a); and
(b)     disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that:
(i)the first person has ever experienced; or
(ii)any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced;
where it is reasonable to conclude that the fear or persecution would not exist if it were assumed that the fear or persecution mentioned in paragraph (a) had never existed.
Note:     Section 5G may be relevant for determining family relationships for the purposes of this section.
5L    Membership of a particular social group other than family
For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person is to be treated as a member of a particular social group (other than the person’s family) if:
(a)     a characteristic is shared by each member of the group; and
(b)     the person shares, or is perceived as sharing, the characteristic; and
(c)     any of the following apply:
(i)the characteristic is an innate or immutable characteristic;
(ii)the characteristic is so fundamental to a member’s identity or conscience, the member should not be forced to renounce it;
(iii)the characteristic distinguishes the group from society; and
(d)     the characteristic is not a fear of persecution.
5LA Effective protection measures
(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country if:
(a)     protection against persecution could be provided to the person by:
(i)the relevant State; or
(ii)a party or organisation, including an international organisation, that controls the relevant State or a substantial part of the territory of the relevant State; and
(b)     the relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (a) is willing and able to offer such protection.
(2)A relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (1)(a) is taken to be able to offer protection against persecution to a person if:
(a)     the person can access the protection; and
(b)     the protection is durable; and
(c)     in the case of protection provided by the relevant State—the protection consists of an appropriate criminal law, a reasonably effective police force and an impartial judicial system.
…
36     Protection visas – criteria provided for by this Act
…
(2)A criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is:
(a)     a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee; or
(aa) a non-citizen in Australia (other than a non-citizen mentioned in paragraph (a)) in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the non-citizen being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that the non-citizen will suffer significant harm; or
(b)     a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:
(i)is mentioned in paragraph (a); and
(ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant; or
(c)     a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:
(i)is mentioned in paragraph (aa); and
(ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant.
(2A)A non‑citizen will suffer significant harm if:
(a)     the non‑citizen will be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life; or
(b)     the death penalty will be carried out on the non‑citizen; or
(c)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to torture; or
(d)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment; or
(e)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to degrading treatment or punishment.
(2B)However, there is taken not to be a real risk that a non‑citizen will suffer significant harm in a country if the Minister is satisfied that:
(a)     it would be reasonable for the non‑citizen to relocate to an area of the country where there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or
(b)     the non‑citizen could obtain, from an authority of the country, protection such that there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or
(c)     the real risk is one faced by the population of the country generally and is not faced by the non‑citizen personally.
…