1911725 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, sought a protection visa, claiming he was unable to access basic human rights and freedom under the Bainimarama government, had suffered psychological harm, and feared targeting by authorities due to his vocal social media posts concerning corruption, violence, and land rights issues. He also cited depression and family issues as reasons for leaving Fiji. The case was heard by Sophie Manera.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant qualified for a protection visa, either as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 or as a person entitled to complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa). This required determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, or political opinion, or if there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal to Fiji.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the 'Refugee Law Guidelines' and 'Complementary Protection Guidelines'. It found that the applicant was a citizen of Fiji and that his claims for protection should be assessed against Fiji as the country of reference. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had used social media to comment on posts about corruption and violence from the previous Fijian government and feared targeting by authorities for being vocal. However, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.