1928714 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the protection visa applications of two applicants from Bangladesh. The first applicant, a Christian woman, claimed she would face harm due to her religion, her status as a separated mother, and her son's potential religious conversion. She also cited family violence and her ex-husband's political connections as reasons for fearing persecution. The second applicant, her son, also sought protection.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under either the refugee criterion or the complementary protection criterion. This involved assessing whether the first applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution based on her religion and membership in a particular social group, and whether either applicant faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Bangladesh. The Tribunal also considered country information regarding the safety and protection available in Bangladesh.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged the country information concerning Bangladesh, including recent political changes. However, it found that the evidence did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for the first applicant on the grounds of her religion or as a separated mother. Crucially, the Tribunal noted a lack of evidence regarding ongoing threats from her former husband, harm to family members, or the outcome of divorce proceedings. Furthermore, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence of current church activities or plans for religious practice if returned, and that the adult son's conversion in Australia did not, in itself, create a risk of persecution. The Tribunal also considered the possibility of relocation within Bangladesh and the availability of state protection, finding these factors weighed against the claims.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that neither applicant satisfied the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visas.