1906306 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Zambia, sought a protection visa, claiming he feared harm upon return due to his membership and advocacy for political freedom within an opposition party, the [Political Party 1]. He alleged a history of persecution, including threats and violence from supporters of the ruling Patriotic Front (PF) party, stemming from land disputes and his involvement in election monitoring. The delegate of the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs refused the application, finding the applicant’s claims not to be credible. The applicant sought review of this decision in the Refugee Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion, and whether he could avail himself of internal relocation within Zambia. This required the Tribunal to assess the applicant's credibility, considering the consistency and coherence of his account, the impact of trauma on his memory, and the weight to be given to documentary evidence and departmental interview procedures, including the availability of an interpreter and the late inclusion of certain evidence.

The Tribunal, presided over by Jane Marquard, found that the delegate had erred in her assessment of the applicant's credibility. While acknowledging inconsistencies in the applicant's account, particularly regarding the date of the 2018 incident and the use of tear gas, the Tribunal considered these discrepancies in light of the applicant's stated trauma and the absence of an interpreter during the departmental interview. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant had a genuine fear of harm due to his political activities and his disputes with ruling party supporters, noting the objective evidence of hostility from the PF. The Tribunal concluded that the delegate had not adequately considered the applicant's passion for social justice as a basis for political opinion and had not properly assessed the risks associated with internal relocation.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the decision to the delegate for reconsideration, directing that the applicant's claims be re-evaluated with due regard to the Tribunal's findings on credibility and the principles of well-founded fear and internal relocation.