1914012 (Refugee)

The applicants, a mother and her son, sought review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning their claims for a protection visa. The dispute centred on whether they would face persecution in Sri Lanka due to their religious conversion and mixed ethnic background. The first applicant, born Sinhalese and Buddhist, converted to Islam in 1996 and married a Tamil Muslim man. The second applicant was raised as a Muslim. They had lived in Australia since 2004, and their relationship with the father and husband, who had a first wife in Sri Lanka, had since ended.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had erred in its assessment of the applicants' claims for protection under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the court needed to determine if the Tribunal had correctly considered the risk of persecution arising from the applicants' adherence to Islam, their mixed ethnic heritage (Sinhalese and Tamil), and the prevailing anti-Muslim sentiment in Sri Lanka, which could lead to them being unable to access state protection.

The court found that the Tribunal had erred in its assessment. It accepted the applicants' evidence that they were identifiable as Muslims through their names and the first applicant's intention to dress more conservatively upon return to Sri Lanka. The court also accepted that the family practiced Islamic traditions. Crucially, the court concluded that the applicants would likely be unable to access effective state protection in Sri Lanka due to their religious identity and the prevailing anti-Muslim sentiment, which could place them at risk of harm.

Consequently, the court remitted the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration. The direction was that the applicants satisfy the criterion set out in section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act*, meaning Australia has protection obligations towards them.