1915130 (Refugee)

This case concerned an application for a protection visa by an individual from Pakistan. The applicant, who is of Hazara ethnicity and practices the Shia faith, alleged a history of persecution and violence in his home region of Quetta. The dispute centred on whether the applicant faced a real chance of significant harm if returned to Pakistan, and whether it would be reasonable for him to relocate to another area within the country to avoid such harm. The matter was heard by Deputy President Denis Dragovic of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as a refugee, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant's fear of persecution was well-founded, considering the risks faced by the Hazara community in Pakistan, and whether effective protection measures were available to him. A key consideration was also whether it would be reasonable for the applicant to relocate to another part of Pakistan, such as Karachi, to avoid any such risk.

The Tribunal considered extensive country information detailing the historical and ongoing persecution of the Hazara community in Pakistan, particularly in Quetta, due to their ethnicity and religious beliefs. While acknowledging evidence suggesting a decline in targeted violence, the Tribunal found that the fundamental nature of the threat to the Hazara, stemming from deeply rooted sectarian animosity, remained. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant faced a real chance of serious harm in Quetta, and that the Pakistani state could not offer effective protection. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a refugee under section 36(2)(a). The Tribunal then considered the complementary protection ground under section 36(2)(aa), assessing the reasonableness of relocation. Despite evidence that targeted attacks on Hazara outside Balochistan had significantly decreased, the Tribunal found that due to the applicant's specific circumstances, including his mental health struggles, lack of financial resources, limited employment prospects due to discrimination, and absence of family support networks in other regions, it would not be reasonable for him to relocate to Karachi.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfied the criterion under section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), meaning Australia had protection obligations towards him.