1918837 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate's decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant, a national of Papua New Guinea, claimed to fear persecution due to tribal violence and domestic violence. The court was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1) of the Act, and if not, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Papua New Guinea, she would suffer significant harm as defined in section 36(2A) of the Act.

The court considered the applicant's initial claims of tribal violence, including the death of her father and the abduction of her mother. Crucially, the court also examined a subsequent statement from the applicant which clarified her claims, asserting that her initial account was fabricated due to a lack of evidence for her true story. In this revised account, the applicant detailed experiences of domestic violence from her husband, who had paid a bride price for her, and threats of violence following her departure from him. The delegate had not accepted the claims of ongoing tribal targeting or domestic violence, and therefore found the applicant did not meet the criteria for a refugee or for complementary protection.

The court noted that the "real risk" test for significant harm under section 36(2A) of the Act imposes the same standard as the "real chance" test for a well-founded fear of persecution. The court ultimately remitted the decision for reconsideration, indicating that the applicant's claims, particularly those relating to domestic violence and the specific social group of women subject to such violence where a bride price has been paid, required further assessment.