1910922 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Papua New Guinea, sought a protection visa in Australia. Her claim was based on a well-founded fear of persecution arising from a land dispute and a subsequent tribal "payback" system. This system was initiated after her brother killed three men from a rival clan, leading to retribution directed at her brother and his family, including the applicant, whose home was set on fire. The applicant's daughter, who had similar claims, was granted a protection visa in Australia. The applicant arrived in Australia in March 2017, briefly returned to PNG due to concerns for her children, and then re-entered Australia, applying for a protection visa approximately three months later.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations, specifically whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of her removal to Papua New Guinea, she faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. This required the Tribunal to determine if she met the definition of a refugee under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), considering her well-founded fear of persecution due to her membership in a particular social group (her family) and the potential for serious harm.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the 'Refugee Law Guidelines' and 'Complementary Protection Guidelines'. It acknowledged that the onus was on the applicant to establish her claims with sufficient evidence, and that the Tribunal was not obliged to make her case for her or accept allegations uncritically. However, after reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal found that the applicant met the definition of a refugee as per section 36(2)(a) of the Act.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).