1918507 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear returning to Pakistan due to his involvement with a local Peace Committee (also known as a Lashkar or Defence Committee) that opposed the Taliban. His family had a history of opposing the Taliban, and he had also worked as a security guard for polio vaccination teams and with an NGO, activities that placed him at risk. The dispute centred on whether these circumstances constituted a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, and whether internal relocation within Pakistan would be a reasonable alternative.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or membership of a particular social group, and whether the harm feared involved serious harm and was systematic and discriminatory. The Tribunal also had to consider whether internal relocation to another part of Pakistan would be reasonable, and if state protection was available and adequate. The applicant’s fear stemmed from his and his family's opposition to the Taliban, his work with groups targeted by the Taliban, and the general security situation in Pakistan, particularly in his home region of Swat.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicant's family had not been harmed despite their activities, this did not negate the risk of future persecution. It noted that attacks on Peace Committee members had been sporadic but continued, indicating an ongoing risk. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant's actual and imputed anti-Taliban political opinion, and his membership in social groups such as Peace Committee members, NGO workers, and polio workers, were the essential and significant reasons for the feared harm. The Tribunal found that internal relocation to Islamabad would not be reasonable due to the applicant's lack of family support, the high cost of living, potential discrimination against Pashtuns, and the limited mental health support available, which could exacerbate his pre-existing conditions. Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the protection offered by Pakistani authorities was insufficient.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies the criterion under s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act, finding that Australia has protection obligations towards him under the Refugees Convention.