2003458 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Thailand, sought review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) to affirm the refusal of a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear persecution in Thailand due to his refusal to sell his land as demanded by local influential figures. He alleged that this refusal had led to threats of killing, physical assault, and an arson attack on his property, and that he could not rely on state protection due to corruption.

The Federal Magistrates Court was required to determine whether the RRT had erred in finding that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of membership of a particular social group. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the applicant's refusal to sell his land, and the resulting threats, placed him within a particular social group as contemplated by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

Magistrate Pennell reasoned that the RRT had correctly applied the principles established in relevant case law concerning the definition of a "particular social group." The Tribunal had found that the group comprising individuals threatened for refusing to sell their land was not a particular social group for the purposes of the *Migration Act*. This was because the shared characteristic of the group – their refusal to sell land – was not a fundamental or immutable characteristic, nor was it based on a characteristic that was inherent to their identity or conscience. The RRT had also considered the applicant's claims regarding state protection and found them to be unsubstantiated.

The application for review was dismissed, with the court affirming the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal.