2002015 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, claiming a fear of harm from the Fijian military due to an imputed political opinion arising from his involvement in an internal military dispute in 1999 and the 2006 coup. The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) country information, which indicated that individuals involved in past coups were unlikely to face official or societal discrimination, particularly those who held public office and were granted constitutional immunity. The applicant's initial claims were also noted to contain contradictions, and his credibility was a concern for the original delegate.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant faced a real chance of persecution by reason of his imputed political opinion, as required for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Act. The Tribunal also considered, by reference to section 36(2)(aa), whether the applicant might meet the criteria for complementary protection, which requires a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's initial claims of fear of harm from the military were undermined by his subsequent retraction during the hearing. He ultimately conceded that the only harm he would face upon return to Fiji was economic harm, specifically a diminished earning capacity. The Tribunal accepted that economic harm constituted a form of harm, but found that it was not a basis for establishing refugee status under the Act. Furthermore, the evidence did not support a finding that the applicant could not sustain himself financially in Fiji, distinct from his ability to support extended family. Given that the applicant no longer held a subjective fear of persecution and had not claimed any other qualifying fear, his application for a protection visa based on refugee status was rejected. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.