1906936 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by two Fijian nationals, a mother and her young child. The applicants claimed they feared persecution upon return to Fiji due to the first applicant's political activities as a campaigner for an opposition party and her familial connection to a relative who had previously been granted a protection visa in Australia. The first applicant also alleged she had been assaulted by soldiers at her workplace.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) as refugees, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as persons in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm upon removal. The Tribunal was required to consider the credibility of the applicants' claims, the evidence presented, and relevant country information regarding the political and security situation in Fiji.

The Tribunal considered the first applicant's claims of being assaulted by soldiers and campaigning for the SODELPA party. However, it noted a lack of evidence of hospitalisation or injuries, her continued employment at the same workplace, and a delay in departing Fiji. The Tribunal also took into account country information indicating that while opposition party leaders faced moderate risk of monitoring and intimidation, senior party members were at low risk, and that the military's role in daily life was generally not disruptive for most citizens. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no formal diagnosis of a mental health condition, and the first applicant's pregnancy and physical health condition were not considered to establish a well-founded fear of persecution. The Tribunal also considered the change of government in Fiji and anti-corruption measures, which did not support the applicants' claims of a current risk.

Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied that either applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or (aa). Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visas to the applicants.