1919266 (Refugee)

The matter concerned a protection visa application made by a Sri Lankan family. The applicants claimed they feared serious harm upon return to Sri Lanka due to the first applicant's profile as a wealthy Muslim businessman, who had experienced extortion and threats from a Sinhalese group prior to their departure. These issues were exacerbated by tensions following the 2019 Easter bombings.

The court was required to determine whether the applicants were owed protection under Australian law. This involved assessing whether the first applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and whether there was a real chance of persecution throughout Sri Lanka, with no effective protection available.

The Tribunal considered extensive evidence, including country information reports and the applicants' testimony. It accepted that the first applicant had faced harm, including extortion and threats from a group led by a local politician, and that anti-Muslim sentiment had increased in Sri Lanka following the 2019 Easter bombings. The Tribunal found that the first applicant's profile, distinguished by past issues with criminal elements and links to the bombings through an employee, presented a real chance of serious harm upon return. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that Australia had protection obligations towards the first applicant as a refugee.

The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration, directing that the first applicant satisfied the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958*. It also directed that the other applicants satisfied the criteria under section 36(2)(b)(i) as members of the same family unit as the first applicant, with their entitlement to a visa dependent on the first applicant's application and the remaining visa criteria being met.