2004217 (Refugee)

[2025] ARTA 699

2004217 (REFUGEE) [2025] ARTA 699 (30 JANUARY 2025)

DECISION AND  

REASONS FOR DECISION

Representative:  Ms Salma Soueid

Respondent:  Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Tribunal Number:  2004217

Tribunal:General Member G Deal

Date:30 January 2025

Place:Melbourne

Decision:The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

Statement made on 30 January 2025 at 9:59am

CATCHWORDS

REFUGEE – protection visa – Lebanon – religion – Sunni – particular social group – mixed-sect parents – forced recruitment to Hezbollah – fear of killing – fear of detention – Australian citizen family – economic and security crisis in Lebanon – delay in applying for protection – referral for Ministerial Intervention – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 5(1), 5AAA, 5H, 5J – 5LA, 36, 65, 351, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2

CASES

EZC18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 2143
GLD18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 2
SZRSN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship  [2013] FMCA 78; SZRSN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship  [2013] FCA 751

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 369 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 27 February 2020 to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2. The applicant claims to be a national of Lebanon. He arrived in Australia on a student visa [in] November 2014.

3. With the assistance of the applicant’s then lawyers he applied for the protection visa (PVA) on 27 March 2017 which included an accompanying statutory declaration (2017 Statement). He attended a protection visa interview on 13 November 2019 (PV Interview).

4. On 27 February 2020 the delegate refused to grant the protection visa. The delegate accepted the applicant’s father was Sunni and his mother Shia. The delegate accepted the applicant was a Sunni Muslim born in [Country 1], who lived in [Country 2] for a period as a young child before his family settled in [Town 1], Southern Beirut, Lebanon (a Hezbollah stronghold at that time) and that after finishing school the applicant relocated to his father’s house and hometown in [Town 2] in the north of Lebanon. Based on country information indicating Hezbollah did not undertake forced recruitment as claimed, and  various other identified issues such as a narrative that was at times very difficult to believe, the applicant’s profile including as a Sunni without any association, training or interest in politics or fighting, and the significant delay in lodging the protection visa application after first arriving in Australia on student visa, the delegate did not accept the applicant and his family were specifically targeted and subjected to severe harassment and mistreatment by Hezbollah as claimed. The delegate considered the applicant’s claim he was viewed as a Hezbollah spy by the Al Salafi when he subsequently moved to the north unsubstantiated and did not accept this. Overall, the delegate did not accept the applicant had a genuine fear of returning to Lebanon, finding the applicant did not have a profile of interest, did not meet the relevant definition of refugee, did not face a real risk of significant harm, and was not a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations. At the review stage, when lodging an ‘Application for review’, his then lawyer provided a copy of the delegate’s decision to the Tribunal.

5. In October 2024, the applicant appointed his representative (from the same firm as his previous representatives). With the assistance of his representative the applicant lodged further written submissions (2024 Submissions) and a statutory declaration by him dated in October 2024 (2024 Statement).

6. The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 29 October 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic (Lebanese) and English languages. The applicant’s representative attended the Tribunal hearing and made oral submissions at hearing.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

   Criteria for protection visa

7. The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s 36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s 36(2)(a), (aa), (b), or (c). That is, he or she is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.

8. Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee.

9. A person is a refugee if, in the case of a person who has a nationality, they are outside the country of their nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country: s 5H(1)(a). In the case of a person without a nationality, they are a refugee if they are outside the country of their former habitual residence and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to return to that country: s 5H(1)(b).

10. Under s 5J(1), a person has a well-founded fear of persecution if they fear being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, there is a real chance they would be persecuted for one or more of those reasons, and the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of the relevant country. Additional requirements relating to a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ and circumstances in which a person will be taken not to have such a fear are set out in ss 5J(2)-(6) and ss 5K-LA, which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.

11. If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s 36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of the visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s 36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’). The meaning of significant harm, and the circumstances in which a person will be taken not to face a real risk of significant harm, are set out in ss 36(2A) and (2B), which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.

12. Section 5AAA of the Act makes clear that it is the applicant’s responsibility to specify all particulars of a claim to be a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations and to provide sufficient evidence to establish the claim. The Tribunal does not have any responsibility or obligation to specify, or assist the applicant in specifying, any particulars of his claims. Nor does the Tribunal have any responsibility or obligation to establish, or assist in establishing, the claim.

    Mandatory considerations

13. In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.84, made under s 499 of the Act, the Tribunal has taken account of the ‘Refugee Law Guidelines’ and ‘Complementary Protection Guidelines’ prepared by the Department of Home Affairs, and country information assessments prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.

    CLAIMS

14. The applicant’s claims can be summarised as follows:

    ·He is a Lebanese Sunni male in his [age range], who has lived in [Country 1], [Country 2], Beirut, and North Lebanon. He has one brother ([Brother A]) in [Country 3], and his parents and [specified family members] are in Australia. He married in Australia in 2021 and has 2 young children. He completed [grade] schooling, further studies in [subject 1] and English and worked in the [specified] industry in Lebanon, studied [subject 2] at University in Australia but did not complete this, and has since worked in [specified businesses], and now runs his own [business] subcontracting as [an occupation 1] in Australia.

    ·His parents are in a mixed-sect marriage as his father is a Sunni from the north and his mother a Shia from the deep south. They faced opposition when they married some 35 years ago but put this behind them and started a family.

    ·His family moved to a Shia dominated area in Beirut in 2001. His school became increasingly Hezbollah controlled or dominated over the years, although he wanted no involvement as he is not political, has not and does not want to fight, or to be involved with any groups. When his high [grade] marks in [subject 3] were publicly broadcast Hezbollah wanted to recruit him to their non-denominational intelligence wing, as a spy, including because he was a Sunni who would be able to spy on the Salafi and other associated groups and recruit others like him. Hezbollah and its supporters  also suspected him of being a Sunni terrorist responsible for terrorist bombings in their area in Beirut. Hezbollah subjected him and his family to years of targeted severe harassment and mistreatment in an effort to force him to join Hezbollah.

    ·Eventually, because of this mistreatment and in fear of his safety he fled to North Lebanon where he lived with extended family in Tripoli and studied and worked. During this period he also sometimes stayed at his father’s house in [Town 2], half an hour from Tripoli.

    ·As a result refusals to join Hezbollah, Hezbollah spread rumours in the north that he was a member of the non-denominational wing of Hezbollah. Those in the north knew his mother was a Shia. The Salafi in the north and those associated with them targeted him, including an extended family member with Salafi connections who tried to persuade him to hate Hezbollah and support the Salafi. They would go and get information from him. He also had an ongoing dispute with an individual in North Lebanon who teased him about his mother because she is a Shia, they had one fight and then abused one anther verbally when they saw one another. In fear of his safety and life he fled Lebanon for Australia in 2014.

    ·His family home in Beirut has been destroyed. His family home in the north is overrun by extended family fleeing the conflict in the south. He has no assets or support network in Lebanon and has been in Australia for 10 years, has fully integrated into Australian society, and fears that given the conflict and conditions resulting from this, that he would struggle to survive in a country where the economy was already failing, and the conditions are poor. If he returned it would be difficult to find work and the conditions in Australia are generally better than in Lebanon.

    ·If he were to return his wife and children would return with him, and it would be unsafe for them, they would be deprived of basic human necessities, and make it difficult to relocate. If he were to return without them it would disrupt his family, without him his wife and children would face financial strain, it would impact their mental health, and he would be unable to continue to run his successful business in Australia.

    ·He fears harm including death, discrimination, harassment, detention, and assault from Hezbollah (and its supporters) and Shias in south Lebanon.  He fears harm including violent attacks, severe bodily harm, discrimination, and death from the Salafi groups (and its supporters) and Sunnis in north Lebanon. There are no effective protection measures available in Lebanon.

    ·He fears harm as a member of particular social groups comprising “young Sunni male with a Shiite mother residing in a Hezbollah stronghold area” and “young Sunni male residing in [Town 1] a Hezbollah stronghold”.

    REASONS AND FINDINGS

15. The Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

16. I note that at commencement of the hearing I explained the role of the interpreter to the applicant, noted it was important we understood one another, advised the applicant to let me know if at any point he did not understand the interpreter or he thought the interpreter did not understand him, and the applicant confirmed he understood the interpreter. It appeared as though the applicant’s representative, who also attended the hearing, spoke Arabic (Lebanese) as on a couple of occasions during the hearing she asked for the interpreter to clarify or restate what had been said or interpreted, which the interpreter promptly did which appears to have addressed those concerns on those occasions when raised. There were no further issues raised in relation to interpretation during or after the hearing.

17. As detailed below the applicant claims he was born in [Country 1], moved to [Country 2] the year after his birth where he remained for some 7 years, and then moved to Lebanon in 2001 where he remained until he left for Australia in 2014. He claims he and his parents are only citizens of Lebanon. At the PV Interview he said that while he was born in [Country 1], he was not given citizenship, and was only able to remain there on a permit that had since expired, which appears consistent with the country information[1] and I am willing to accept this. When asked at the hearing how he and his family were able to reside in [Country 2] for an odd 7 years, the applicant said that it was based on his father working there, that it was not permanent right, and that the right would have since expired, which appears consistent with the country information and I am willing to accept this.[2] The applicant has consistently claimed to be a citizen of Lebanon, not to be a citizen of any other country, and to not have a right to reside elsewhere, and on his evidence including his Lebanese passport I accept this. I consider Lebanon the receiving country. Based on his passport the applicant is in his [age range].

    [1] [Source deleted.]

    [2]  [Source deleted.]

18. The applicant has consistently claimed to be a Sunni Muslim. As noted above his PVA states he was born in [Country 1], left for [Country 2] with his family as an infant the following year where he remained for some 7 years, relocated to [Town 1], Beirut, Lebanon, with his family at primary school age where he completed primary and secondary schooling in [specified year] returning to [Country 1] once during this period to visit his grandparents in 2006 and that he also completed English studies and a certificate in [subject 1], in [specified years], respectively. While his PVA stated this latter study was undertaken in Beirut, somewhat at odds with this the accompanying 2017 Statement said his father “snuck” him out of Beirut to North Lebanon (Tripoli) to stay with a cousin because of issues in Beirut at around that time. Given these variations at hearing I noted there had been a lack of clarity in relation to his address history. The applicant said there might have been an error in the PVA, and he clarified that immediately after finishing school in [specified year] he moved to Tripoli to live with a cousin, and while living there he would also sometimes stay at his father’s house in [Town 2] (which he said was only about 1/2 an hour away from Tripoli) and that between [specified years] he studied English privately with a tutor in Tripoli and [subject 1] at a small institution in Tripoli. In response to my questions at hearing the applicant also said that their apartment in Beirut belonged to his grandfather, his grandfather had lived in [Country 1] since the 1970s, and so he gave the Beirut property to them and that when they moved to Lebanon in 2001 his father chose to stay at that property because it was easier to find work there, but that now the building had been destroyed and could collapse at any time (as a result of the recent strikes in southern Beirut). He also said that they were only going to visit his grandparents in 2006 for a brief period but that this trip was extended to 3 months because there was some conflict in Lebanon at the time which is consistent with country information indicating an escalation in a conflict in Lebanon that time.[3] At hearing I noted that the only identity document provided to date was his Lebanese passport. I asked if he had a Lebanese identity card and family Civil Extract. The applicant indicated he did but not with him at that time. He said he would find it at home and provide the identity card and would ask his father if he had a family Civil Extract and if he did, he would provide it. Although I note to date none of these documents have been provided to the Tribunal. As detailed above the PVA was at odds with the 2017 Statement in relation to the applicant’s address history, although they were lodged at the same time, and based on the applicant’s detailed spontaneous oral evidence at the PV Interview it appears the PVA may not have been exacting in relation to these background details, and the applicant provided a good level of detail about the family home in Beirut and [Town 2] at hearing. On the evidence I am willing to accept he was in Beirut until about [specified year], moved to Tripoli to stay with a cousin in [that year] immediately after finishing school, where he studied English and [subject 1] as claimed, also often stayed in the family home in [Town 2] half an hour away during this period, may have briefly returned to visit the family in Beirut on occasion, and that overall he was living in North Lebanon for an odd 2 years before leaving for Australia in 2014. In his 2017 Statement he also said he worked various retail jobs while in the north and planning his travel to Australia and at hearing he said worked in a [shop] and that his father also supported him at that time. On the consistent and plausible evidence I accept he is a Sunni Muslim and based on the broadly consistent evidence, and spontaneous oral evidence at hearing, which as noted above was detailed at times, I accept the applicant’s background claims regarding his faith, address, education, and work history in Lebanon.

    [3] Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, ‘Lebanon: Recruitment practices of Hezbollah, including instances of forced recruitment; consequences for those that refuse to join and their family members, including instances of torture; state protection (2010-October 2013)’, 4 November 2013, LBN104638.E.

19. In the applicant’s PVA he said his father, mother, [and specified family members] were in Australia and another brother, [Brother A], was in Lebanon. In his 2024 Statement and at hearing he clarified that [one sibling] and [their spouse] married in Lebanon but also undertook a ceremony in Australia and so [they] entered Australia in 2015 on what sounded like a partner visa to marry again in Australia, and then a couple of months later his other family members entered Australia on tourist visas with a view to attending the wedding, and that [this sibling] was now an Australian citizen, and his other family member had applied for protection visas. The 2024 Statement claims [Brother A] left Lebanon in 2022 “seeking a better life”, married a [Country 3] woman, and was now in [Country 3]. At hearing when asked about this the applicant clarified that [Brother A] also lived with the cousin in Tripoli sometimes living in their father’s house in [Town 2]  up until 2022, he married a woman he met in Lebanon whose mother is from [Country 3], and they left for [Country 3] in 2022. Based on the broadly consistent claims, and spontaneous and detailed oral evidence at hearing, which is also plausible, I accept the applicant’s claims regarding his family, including their migration histories and locations.

1. In the applicant’s PVA he said he worked in [industry 1] and lived with his family in Australia. The 2024 Statement states the applicant studied [subject 2] at University in Sydney but did not complete it (which he confirmed at hearing) and then looked for work. It also states that since being in Australia he has undertaken further training (which he confirmed at hearing was on the job training) and worked in [industry 1], in [another business], and now runs his own business subcontracting as [an occupation 1] which he confirmed at hearing. The 2024 Submissions also advise the applicant married a woman in 2021, who is an Australian citizen, they had 2 children, in [specified years], respectively, and his wife is a stay-at-home mother, which he confirmed at hearing.  Based on the broadly consistent claims, and his spontaneous oral evidence at hearing in relation to more recent events, I accept the applicant’s background claims regarding his education and work in Australia and wife and children.

2. The applicant has consistently claimed his father is a Sunni originally from [Town 2] a Sunni majority province, and his mother is a Shia from [a named town in] Lebanon which is in the south, and that their families opposed their marriage. In his 2017 Statement the applicant said his parents were married some 35 years ago in [Country 1]. He said they “faced much opposition” in relation to their marriage being from different sects but put it behind them due to their love for one another. As was noted at hearing, his parents married over 30 years ago outside of Lebanon, in [Country 1], and later lived as a family in Lebanon for some 13 years with the applicant up until around 2014. At hearing the applicant vaguely said in response that it was getting worse. Based on the consistent claim I accept the applicant’s father is a Sunni originally from [Town 2] and his mother a Shia from the south of Lebanon and that initially his parents may have faced some judgement from family or those close to them in relation to their union, but put it behind them, started a family, lived for many years as a family in Lebanon, have now been together for decades, and appear to have had the support of some extended family for example, the grandparents gave them their apartment in Beirut to live and raise their family.

3. The applicant claims that when he and his family first arrived in [Town 1], Lebanon, in 2001 they were vigorously questioned by Hezbollah who took their details because it was illegal to reside there unless you were registered. I am willing to accept that as part of registration processes for the area Hezbollah took their details as claimed, as they would have anyone wishing to move to the area at that time. The applicant has also claimed that it is easy to tell someone’s faith by their name and based on online material I accept some names can be viewed as having Sunni origin.[4]

   [4] Quaranicnames (22 July 2022) < <Muslim Boy Names – Boy Names from the Quran - 2380 Names for Muslims>  

4. The applicant claims he and his family were specifically targeted by Hezbollah over an extended period between 2001 and 2015 when they were subjected to extreme pressure and severe mistreatment by Hezbollah and those working for them in an effort to force them to join Hezbollah. However for the reasons that follow, as was noted at hearing, these claims have varied, and have at times been vague and lacking in detail.

5. In the applicant’s PVA and submissions prior to the hearing he claimed that over the years his school became increasingly Hezbollah dominated and that in their last year of schooling Hezbollah would increasingly come to the school and pressure students to join and undertake training with them, including so that they could fight for them in Syria. The applicant claims he disliked this, had no interest in joining, and would do all sorts of things to avoid this, such as saying he needed to go to the toilet and then leave by bribing the guards at the school gates so he could go home. Most of his friends became involved and a large percentage of his classmates had since died fighting for Hezbollah in Syria. However aspects of these claims varied significantly. For example, in his PVA and written submissions prior to the hearing he claimed his friends from school who were training with Hezbollah would harass him because he did not want to join, would urge him to do as they were doing, and not study in Australia, that they basically cut him off, and significantly some would follow him home at knifepoint due to his refusals to join. In contrast, at hearing he said it was a friend who was from Hezbollah’s rival, rather than Hezbollah, who one day came out of nowhere and then followed him with a knife, and he made no mention of friends from school from Hezbollah who he previously claimed did this, despite opportunity.

6. I acknowledge that there can be a complex mix of reasons for why someone might have a profile of interest and that the applicant has always alluded to his parents mixed-sect marriage as being an issue. However, his claims at the primary stage suggested his parent’s mixed-sect marriage was more of an issue for his parents when they first married and when he later moved to North Lebanon given his mother is Shia (and the north is predominately Sunni). In this regard the applicant’s 2017 Statement emphasised how it was after his high score  in [subject 3] in [grade] was announced (after he claims their exam results were announced on public radio and online) that Hezbollah became interested in recruiting him (albeit to the non-denominational wing of Hezbollah as he was a Sunni) and that this was what led to a call from their education department asking to meet him (although he did not attend the meeting) and a series of other subsequent strategies to exert intense pressure on him to join, which eventually forced him to flee to the north immediately after finishing school in [specified year] for his safety. In contrast, following the delegate’s finding the applicant did not have a profile of interest with Hezbollah as claimed and refusal of the applicant’s protection visa application in 2020, the 2024 Submissions lodged with the Tribunal emphasised the applicant’s parent’s mixed-sect marriage as the reason for attracting Hezbollah’s attention suggesting his “religious heritage” was why Hezbollah was interested in him and his family. It submitted this made the applicant vulnerable to harm including discrimination in a country fractured by sectarianism, because in southern Lebanon his Sunni faith made him a target for Hezbollah, including its supporters such as militant groups aligned with Hezbollah, who were growing increasingly paranoid and cracking down on anyone seen unsympathetic. It was submitted this background was interpreted as political or religious allegiance to opposing groups. In contrast, at hearing when asked about events in Lebanon, somewhat at odds with claims he was of positive interest to Hezbollah because they wanted to recruit him given his high score in [subject 3] (and Sunni faith) the applicant also claimed, for the first time, that he was also viewed with suspicion by Hezbollah as a Sunni extremist responsible for terrorist bombings in the area. In this regard, at hearing he said that there were a few explosions under their apartment. [A high official] of Hezbollah lived a few streets behind them and that was also targeted by Sunni extremists. He said they considered he was part of the explosions that took place resulting in the killing of his neighbours (and that he saw their dead bodies at the time). He also claimed for the first time, that people believed he worked for a party that was Hezbollah’s rival (like the friend he claimed at hearing followed him with a knife one day) and that in order to convince them that he was not, he would have to have joined Hezbollah. At hearing I clarified whether he was now also claiming that Hezbollah saw him as a suspect in Sunni terrorist attacks in the area as this had not been claimed before. He said yes that they did not accuse him but only suspected him because otherwise they would have arrested him. When I asked what it was that made him think he was a  suspect the applicant vaguely said it was the way people were acting, and that they had changed the way they acted toward him.

7. The applicant’s claims regarding events with a Sheik and subsequent veiled threat in the form of being tailed by a vehicle by Hezbollah have also varied significantly and been vague. In his 2017 Statement he claimed he was at a café in a square known as a Hezbollah stronghold when a Sheik who initially spoke to him and some friends as a group about fighting Israel, later pulled him aside after being alerted to the fact he was a Sunni and exerted more pressure on him to join Hezbollah, advising he could join their non-Shia arm, the Saraya al Moqawama al-Lubnaniyya, to spy on the Salafists, and offered him large financial and other incentives if he did so. He did not agree to join at the time, felt pressured, and said he would think about it for a few days. He claimed that  “a few days later” he was followed by a caravan with tinted windows and no number plates and believed this was a veiled threat by Hezbollah because he had not responded to their requests to join. In his 2017 Statement he also briefly claimed his father was also called by Hezbollah twice and that they asked for the applicant. In his 2017 Statement he vaguely claimed a friend of his who was in Hezbollah at the time confirmed for him that Hezbollah had a file on him and his family and were suspicious of them. In his 2024 Statement he said the incident with the Sheik occurred in about July 2013. In contrast, at hearing after he had spoken about the incident with the Sheik I asked when this occurred. He said between 2010 and 2012. When I rephrased the question given the vague date provided, in contrast to his earlier evidence that this was in about or after July 2013, at hearing he said it was about 2011. In contrast to his earlier evidence that this was an unmarked caravan with tinted windows and no number plates, in his 2024 Submission he said he was followed by “unmarked cars”, at hearing he initially said it was a van with a sliding door, later adding that the people were wearing masks, then later referred to it as a caravan, and later at hearing added that there was a motorbike inside the caravan and a walkie talkie. In contrast to his earlier evidence that he was tailed by a vehicle (of some sort) “a few days” after speaking with the Sheik in 2013, at hearing he said this occurred on the same day while he was walking home after speaking with the Sheik in 2011. At hearing I asked if there was something objective that showed the vehicle was Hezbollah or whether this was just his guess. He variously said it was well known that if there was a caravan they were going to either abduct you or it was a threat and that no one could do anything in the area except Hezbollah. I noted he was never abducted or interrogated. He said he was a person of interest to them and that they had interrogated his father and he had been subjected to ongoing pressure. Later at hearing when I raised the issue of how he knew it was Hezbollah in the vehicle he said there were 2 people in it and that they stopped and then would go back and repeated his earlier claims about it having no registration. At hearing when I asked about his claimed friend from Hezbollah who he said found out they had a file on him and his family, he claimed this person was a school friend. I noted in light of that that he would have been a new or more junior member of Hezbollah and queried how he would have been privy to this sort of intelligence as a more junior member. The applicant essentially claimed this friend came from a family heavily involved in Hezbollah, would have been in training for a number of years by that stage, and had asked others higher up in Hezbollah. I asked why if he came from Hezbollah this person would help the applicant. I found the applicant’s response, essentially describing how his friend found out what being following by a caravan meant by asking people higher up, did not address the issue raised, and note he has otherwise claimed these students involved with Hezbollah essentially ostracised and bullied him.

8. In his PVA and written submissions prior to the hearing the applicant claimed his father started driving a taxi when they arrived in Lebanon in 2001. He claimed that while the customers appeared as though they were just family groups or groups of people visiting sites in Lebanon, and asking for photos to be taken, his father became increasingly suspicious that they were Hezbollah informants pretending to be tourists and pretending to take photos simply because they were visiting well-known Salafi areas and the besieged Jabal Mohsen area. He claimed that because of this his father stopped driving taxis some 7 years later as he did not want to participate in these sorts of activities. Then when he commenced working as [related occupation] Hezbollah would approach him and demand he join them and order his sons to join but his father explicitly refused. The applicant also claimed his father was abducted and assaulted by a group of Hezbollah men after finishing work at 4 am one morning in December 2015 and that they drove him around and “interrogated”, “brutalized” and “assaulted” his father regarding his refusals to join and to direct his sons to join. As noted above in written submissions prior to hearing he also claimed his father was called by Hezbollah and threatened in relation to the applicant and his brother and their refusals to join Hezbollah. While I acknowledge these events did not concern the applicant personally and that the claimed abduction purportedly happened after the applicant left Lebanon, these are significant claims and have been raised and relied on by the applicant in written submissions, however, at hearing he only made vague and passing reference to these and did not particularise or elaborate on them, despite opportunity and the claimed seriousness and significance of these events.

9. I acknowledge that at that time Hezbollah were a Shia resistance movement, with an extensive security apparatus, political organisation, and social services network, often described as a state within a state with entire areas under its control[5], and had a non-denominational wing that Sunnis could join[6]. I also acknowledge that the applicant appears to claim they saw something special in him because of his high score in [subject 3] and, it seems, his Sunni faith and his mother’s Shi’ism. However, as was noted at hearing, the applicant’s claims of a campaign of severe harassment in an effort to force him (and his father and [Brother A]) to join Hezbollah despite their refusals is at odds with the country information at that time which indicated recruitment was voluntarily[7]. In this regard it reported that at around that time membership was based on allegiance to the organisation’s ideology with many young Shias naturally gravitating toward the organisation that helped to empower their community. It reported Hezbollah recruiters wielded influence and looked out for likely prospects among young men and woman who could fit into the Hezbollah way of life who would then be approached to see if they would like to join and if they did, they would undergo training and would be paid a salary. It reported that since the end of the 2006 war until about 2010 Hezbollah had undergone its largest recruitment and training program which had since slowed. It reported full party membership was offered to applicants and recruits on the basis of allegiance to the organisation’s ideological program with there being no compulsion to join, as the party only sought those unreservedly committed to its ideology, and any recruits who were unconvinced after weeks of educational courses were free to leave, as recruitment was based on voluntariness. It noted reports of people being pressured to do things by Hezbollah that they did not want to do such as donating money, or social pressure within Shiite families or in remote villages against those not wiling to become members or expressing opposition to the party, but that “forced recruitment” was a rarity if it occurred and no cases of violations against people who simply refused to become members of Hezbollah had been reported to the Lebanese Centre for Human Rights. I also noted at hearing that Hezbollah targeted critics who might represent a threat to its control (the applicant’s own evidence indicates he and his family do not have this profile, as the applicant has consistently claimed they are not aligned with any groups, are not political, want no involvement in any fighting, and did everything to avoid Hezbollah, which I accept).[8] The applicant agreed, but noted that at the beginning of the Syrian war they lost a lot of fighters so were conscripting outside the Shia community, he was targeted to be part of intelligence, and essentially he would be used as a Sunni from the north as a spy, to find out what they were planning, and that they were trying to recruit him so he could become a leader and then he could recruit more agents.

   [5] Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, ‘Lebanon: Recruitment practices of Hezbollah, including instances of forced recruitment; consequences for those that refuse to join and their family members, including instances of torture; state protection (2010-October 2013)’, 4 November 2013, LBN104638.E.

   [6] Hizballah’s Lebanese Resistance Brigades (Nov/Dec 2014) Combating Terrorism Center at West Point <

   [7] Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, ‘Lebanon: Recruitment practices of Hezbollah, including instances of forced recruitment; consequences for those that refuse to join and their family members, including instances of torture; state protection (2010-October 2013)’, 4 November 2013, LBN104638.E.

   [8] DFAT, 'DFAT Country Report Lebanon', Australian Government - Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Government’, 25 February 2014, CIS27343.

10. At hearing I noted that despite claims of ongoing targeting by various groups in Lebanon including Hezbollah over a number of years the applicant had never been detained, abducted, assaulted, interrogated, or otherwise physically harmed in Lebanon by any group. The applicant said that was correct that he was never physically harmed but he said he experienced trauma which in turn affected his mental health and then appeared to briefly allude to the claim first raised at hearing about the explosions in his area (noted above).

11. The applicant first arrived in Australia in 2014 on a student visa and did not apply for a protection visa until 2017. In his 2017 Statement he seemed to indicate he only started to fear harm in Lebanon years after he first arrived in Australia because of increased tension in Lebanon and reports he was still being sought by Hezbollah. He claims that because of this he found a migration agent who lodged the PVA in 2017. As noted in the delegate’s decision provided by the applicant, when the delay in lodging his PVA was noted at the PV Interview the applicant said he believed that after finishing his studies in Australia he would return to Lebanon but his [sibling] followed him to Australia and then his family came and told him things were worse and that was when he realised he could not return. The 2024 Submission reiterated this stating that when he arrived in Australia “while the situation in Lebanon was difficult, [he] still believed it was possible to return safely”, that after his family arrived in Australia and told him about the deterioration in conditions, he realised it was no longer safe. It also advised that his family arrived in Australia in 2015, which is an odd 2 years prior to his lodging his PVA. His 2024 Submission indicated for the first time that the delay was also because his student visa was valid until May 2017, so he knew he had time to carefully consider his options. When asked at hearing why he left Lebanon for Australia in 2014, while the applicant made vague mention of the “threats and problems” he had experienced and mentioned explosions that took place in his area, his more detailed reasons centred around him being able to study, as he said he came to Australia with a view to learn because in Lebanon you could not study unless you belonged to a party, and that meant that you would not be able to go to a good university unless you belonged to a particular political party and you would have to join one of them or you would not be able to study. When I noted that it sounded like he travelled to Australia to study he indicated that was correct. When I asked if there were any other reasons he left Lebanon, he reiterated his claims regarding study, stating that unless you belonged to a political group you would not be able to go to a good university, you would not be able to learn, and you would not be able to receive a good education. As was noted at hearing, not only has his evidence about the delay in his lodging his PVA varied with time, but his explanations are also at odds with his central claim he had to flee to the north of Lebanon and then to Australia an odd 2 years later because he feared for his life because of targeting by Hezbollah and the Salafi (or those working with them). The applicant vaguely said it was very scary and that it devastated his life. He also said that initially when his father arrived in Australia, he had the visa for 3 years, he said he had gone through issues and had big problems and that that was when he realised he could not go back. Then he appeared to suggest that the delay was also caused by delays in finding a good lawyer. While I acknowledge delays can be caused by all sorts of issues and that the applicant applied for the PVA just months before the expiry date of his student visa, I am not persuaded by his varied and increasingly elaborate reasons for the long delay in lodging his PVA and note that his own evidence has appeared contradictory on this point. On the evidence I do not accept the various reasons for his delay in lodging his PVA and consistent with some of his evidence I consider he travelled to Australia to study and do not accept he fled Lebanon in 2014 genuinely in fear of his life or safety at that time.

1. Given [Town 1] Beirut, where the applicant lived while growing up in Lebanon, was an area controlled by Hezbollah and dominated by Shia, on the evidence including the country information noted above about the then dominance of Hezbollah,[9] and DFAT’s report that those of recognised religion (such as Sunni Islam) who live in an area where they are a minority might face low-level societal discrimination, I am willing to accept as plausible that there might have been some pressure exerted on all young people in the area to join Hezbollah at that time including the applicant, including while at school, that he did not want to join, tried to avoid these events/pressure, that this environment might have made him feel uncomfortable and excluded as a Sunni in a Shia dominated and Hezbollah controlled area, he might have been paranoid and felt like he was being treated differently, and may have relocated to the north after finishing school because of this and to study English and [subject 1]. However, on the evidence, which has at times varied significantly and been vague and/or lacking in detail and at odds with the country information, and given he was never kidnapped or otherwise physically harmed despite claims on ongoing serious targeting, and the significant delay in his lodging his PVA, I do not accept the applicant was specifically and personally targeted by Hezbollah as claimed, including being personally threatened whether by the Sheik in the square, or tailed by Hezbollah in a caravan or other vehicle, called and harassed, viewed or suspected of being a Sunni terrorist, that his father unwittingly drove Hezbollah spies around or was called and threatened to join and to force his sons to join, or that his father was abducted in 2015 by Hezbollah and assaulted, as part of a claimed campaign of forceful recruitment, or that because of their refusals Hezbollah spread rumours about them in the north.

   [9] Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, ‘Lebanon: Recruitment practices of Hezbollah, including instances of forced recruitment; consequences for those that refuse to join and their family members, including instances of torture; state protection (2010-October 2013)’, 4 November 2013, LBN104638.E

2. The applicant claims that once he moved to North Lebanon people there targeted him as they believed he was a Hezbollah spy, although as noted at hearing and detailed below the applicant’s evidence in this regard has also been varied and vague.

3. In his 2017 Statement and 2024 Submissions the applicant claimed that in light of events in Beirut his father “snuck” him out of [Town 1] to live in Tripoli in North Lebanon at a cousin’s house, which he confirmed at hearing was in [specified year] immediately after finishing school. In his 2017 Statement and 2024 Submissions he vaguely claimed it was not safe there for him either, as a new random in the area and it was known his mother was Shia which led to suspicion among Salafi groups that he was a spy for Hezbollah. He also claimed Hezbollah commenced spreading rumours about him and his father being spies for Saraya Al Moukawama because of their refusals to join Hezbollah. His relative who had Salafi connections used to pressure him to support the Salafi cause and hate Hezbollah. In the applicant’s 2017 Statement he claimed he could not visit or reside anywhere in north Lebanon or [Town 2] in his father’s house, because his [Brother A] was targeted there, and his father was approached by a member and asked if he were a member of Saraya Al Moukawama which he denied.

4. At hearing I noted it was not clear why the applicant had formed the view he was not safe in the north as there was no particularised evidence to demonstrate that he was viewed with suspicion. In a rather draw out fashion, after I posed a series of questions, the applicant explained he had an ongoing dispute with one person in the area who picked on the applicant because the applicant’s mother was a Shia and if someone derogated his mother it angered him. He seemed to state that he had not mentioned this before because it concerned his mother. He seemed to say they had a physical fight but then the dispute dissipated over time into ongoing verbal abuse. I noted this just sounded like he had a personal dispute with someone he did not get along with in the north. The applicant agreed but said it was not good as it meant he was disliked in the area and at other points described it as bullying. At another point in the hearing the applicant named a family member claiming they were part of Daish and indicated they had since been imprisoned. He vaguely said the Salafi believed he was part of Hezbollah and used to always go and seek information and get information from him because of this. When I noted he had not previously specifically claimed people had gone to get information from him when he was in the north, the applicant denied this claiming he had, and then said it only happened once, but that once his relative was arrested he no longer had any issues in the north and that it was not as bad in the north as it was in the south with Hezbollah.

5. At hearing I also noted claims regarding [Brother A], that [Brother A] had lived in the north for years, and I noted that there was nothing in the applicant’s evidence to show that [Brother A] was actually targeted and that these claims had been vague. The applicant asked who targeted [Brother A]. I said it was not clear from his evidence who targeted [Brother A]. The applicant asked me again who targeted [Brother A]. I noted that that was precisely the point, it was unclear based on his evidence who targeted [Brother A] because his evidence on this had been vague. The applicant then said [Brother A] received the same treatment as the applicant because he was the son of a Shia mother, but that his [Brother A] was not as wanted by Hezbollah as the applicant. I noted that [Brother A] remained living in the north including in the family home in [Town 2] for a number of years before leaving for [Country 3] in 2022. The applicant agreed stating that he was living in the cousin’s house in Tripoli and family home in [Town 2] from time to time and he was bullied like the applicant was bullied but that nothing else happened after that.

6. Based on the broadly consistent claim and spontaneous oral evidence at hearing I am willing to accept the applicant may have had an extended family member who supported the Salafi or Sunni extremists who tried once to exert his influence over the applicant by speaking with him when he initially moved to the north, and that the applicant had a personal dispute with someone who taunted him over his mother being Shia which dissipated into a verbal dispute over time, and this person may have similarly taunted [Brother A] when he was in the north, although it does not appear to have been too problematic as [Brother A] remained there for a number of years before leaving in 2022 and there is no evidence of him having been otherwise harmed in that time. I acknowledge references to country information in the submissions about terrorist attacks, a suspected Hezbollah member being killed in Tripoli in 2014, and Sunnis killed in Tripoli for refusing to join a Sunni extremist group. However on the evidence, including the vague and varied claims, that the applicant was never kidnapped or otherwise physically harmed while in Lebanon, the delay in lodging his PVA, and that as noted above I do not accept Hezbollah spread rumours that the applicant (or his family) was a member of Hezbollah, I do not accept he (or his family) was targeted or otherwise questioned by the Salafi, Sunni extremists, their supporters, or other Sunnis in the north because of this. Overall, I do not accept the applicant fled Lebanon in fear of his life or safety in 2014 for Australia. I accept he left to study in Australia.

7. The applicant is a Sunni male in his [age range], whose father is Sunni and mother is Shia. He felt pressure to join Hezbollah and excluded or viewed with suspicion by others as a Sunni in a Shia dominated area and Hezbollah stronghold while growing up. He experienced some pressure from an extended family to join the Salafi cause when he subsequently moved to the north, a Sunni dominated area, and may have experienced some harassment and verbal abuse from a person in the north who knew his mother was a Shia. 

8. I have considered the 2024 Submissions and 2024 Statement which refer to a number of more recent publications (from BBC News, Al Jazeera, DFAT, UN News, World Bank, Smarttraveller, United Nationals Security Council and Council on Foreign Relations and International Crisis Group, ESCWA, NBC News) in making more generalised submissions about conditions in Lebanon following a severe escalation on 8 October 2023 resulting in war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. While I have considered the various country information reports and other sources relied on by the applicant in his written submissions (which provide some historical context, such as information about the 2013 terrorist attack in Tripoli) those other events were some time ago, that information is dated, and in making my decision in this matter I have placed more reliance on more recent, independent and detailed publications such as that by DFAT and Human Rights Watch (HRW) (which were also relied on by the applicant in his submissions) and other recent publications containing information put to the applicant at hearing.[10]

   [10] DFAT, 'DFAT Country Information Report: Lebanon', 26 June 2023, 20230626100419; HRW 'Human Rights Watch World Report 2023', 12 January 2023, 20230112144355; The World Bank,  'Lebanon Economic Monitor - Fall 2023 : In the Grip of a New Crisis', 21 December 2023, 20240208112536; Foreign Affairs, ‘What the Lebanese people really think of Hezbollah’, 12 July 2024; UN News, ‘Lebanon Crisis: UN human rights office calls for probe into Israel Strike’, 15 October 2024; Reuters, ‘How Hezbollah is trying to counter Israel’s high-tech surveillance’, 9 July 2024; ABC, ‘One month of war: Lebanese people across the world come together to help displaced’, 26 October 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Could rival Lebanese factions exploit a weakened Hezbollah’, 30 September 2024; BBC, ‘Israel launches ground invasion in Lebanon’, 1 October 2024; BBC, ‘At least five killed in central Beirut air strike, as Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah facilities’, 30 September 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Mapping over a year of cross-border attacks between Israel and Lebanon’, 13 October 2024; Hanin Ghaddar et al, Mapping clashes along the Isael-Lebanon border, The Washington Institute (2024) <

9. I acknowledge the applicant lived in Beirut for some 11 years and in the north for only 2 years. As detailed below, I accept as plausible that his family’s apartment in Beirut has now been destroyed as a result of the recent conflict. However, as was noted at hearing, his father is originally from [Town 2] in the north where he has a house, the applicant has extended family in Tripoli in the north, he lived and worked in Tripoli in the odd 2 years leading up to his departure for Australia in 2014, his brother also lived in Tripoli (sometimes also staying at the father’s house) until 2022, and many in Lebanon have fled to the north for their safety given Israel’s targeting of the south.[11] At hearing I noted that even if travel overland from the international airport in Beirut to Tripoli was not safe, online reports suggested Tripoli and the north was accessible via ferry from neighbouring countries, which the applicant appeared to acknowledge.[12] The applicant claims that following the fighting in Hezbollah areas, the family in the south have moved to his father’s house in [Town 2] resulting in overcrowding. This may be the case, and I acknowledge the issues he experienced there in the past, however I still consider that if the applicant were to return, he would very likely return to Tripoli, a predominately Sunni area, where he has extended family, his father has a house just half an hour away, and where he and his [Brother A] (up until more recently) have lived and worked in the past. While submissions have been made in the context of relocation, I have not had to consider this issue.

   [11] ABC, ‘One month of war: Lebanese people across the world come together to help displaced’, 26 October 2024.

   [12] Dada Star, Maritime Optima <

10. The sources[13] report that while Lebanon was historically one of the Arab region’s most affluent and developed non-oil producing countries, conditions deteriorated, and prior to the recent conflict with Israel Lebanon was already experiencing issues. DFAT reports that while the United Nations had scaled up its humanitarian assistance in response, Lebanon’s economy almost collapsed in 2019 with decades of reported deliberate, reckless fiscal and monetary policy leading to an economic crisis. This resulted in the currency significantly losing value, very high inflation increasing costs in relation to food, electricity, water and gas. This impacted the provision of public services like schools, medicines and medical supplies with about half the population unable to access healthcare given rising costs and some failures with the mandatory insurance health system because of the economic crisis. It reported there was little in the way of social welfare. It reported these conditions had pushed over 80 percent of the population into poverty (although DFAT’s report indicates this is overstated and more like 50%), with marginalised communities such as refugees, children, those with disabilities, older people, migrant workers, and LGBT people being disproportionately impacted. HRW reported decades of corruption and mismanagement of the electricity sector meant the state was unable to provide more than 2 to 3 hours of electricity per day forcing people to use generators at high costs. HRW reported corruption and mismanagement had led to the 2020 port explosion in Beirut killing many and efforts to find those responsible had been ineffective with the judiciary lacking independence and being susceptible to political interference. As at 2021 unemployment was high (at 12.5%), youth unemployment (15 to 24 years) was even higher (at 25%), and there was significant competition between the Lebanese community and Syrian refugees, even for unskilled work, leading to tensions between the two communities. Corruption was widespread and having connections or wasta was important including for work. Lebanon’s security situation was uncertain due to conflict with neighbouring countries, tensions between Hezbollah and Israel, terrorist threats from internal and external actors, and occasionally, communal violence (relatively low-level and localised violence between community groups such as the Alwites and Sunnis in Tripoli and Shia Hezbollah and Sunni or Christian groups in Beirut) and historical armed clashes in Tripoli between rival families and crime gangs. DFAT also reported that protestors were required to obtain a permit ahead of protests and that authorities had responded harshly to protest movements in Lebanon in the past (although I note the applicant has not claimed any involvement or interest in becoming involved in protests or political groups). Another report indicates pollution has also been an issue in Lebanon for some time.[14]

    [13] DFAT, 'DFAT Country Information Report: Lebanon', 26 June 2023, 20230626100419; HRW 'Human Rights Watch World Report 2023', 12 January 2023, 20230112144355; The World Bank,  'Lebanon Economic Monitor - Fall 2023 : In the Grip of a New Crisis', 21 December 2023, 20240208112536; ABC, ‘One month of war: Lebanese people across the world come together to help displaced’, 26 October 2024; Foreign Affairs, ‘What the Lebanese people really think of Hezbollah’, 12 July 2024; UN News, ‘Lebanon Crisis: UN human rights office calls for probe into Israel Strike’, 15 October 2024; Reuters, ‘How Hezbollah is trying to counter Israel’s high-tech surveillance’, 9 July 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Could rival Lebanese factions exploit a weakened Hezbollah’, 30 September 2024; BBC, ‘Israel launches ground invasion in Lebanon’, 1 October 2024; BBC, ‘At least five killed in central Beirut air strike, as Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah facilities’, 30 September 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Mapping over a year of cross-border attacks between Israel and Lebanon’, 13 October 2024; Hanin Ghaddar et al, Mapping clashes along the Israel-Lebanon border, The Washington Institute (2024) < .

    [14] Human Rights Watch, ‘As if you’re inhaling your death – the health risks of burning waste in Lebanon’, 1 December 2017.

11. The sources[15] also report Hezbollah is a designated terrorist organisation in most Western countries including Australia and had over time gained considerable power in Lebanon. The sources report that war between Hezbollah and Israel erupted in around September 2024 after a year of cross-border exchanges, Hezbollah fired rockets into Israel following the October 7 attack, and Hezbollah’s leader Sayad Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated by Israeli air strikes. I also acknowledge the applicant’s submissions that Australia strongly advises against travel to Lebanon in light of the conflict. As was noted at hearing the sources including a live map provided by the Washington Institute show Israel is targeting Hezbollah military targets in Beirut’s south, south Lebanon along the border with Israel, and the Beqaa Valley, damaging buildings, infrastructure, injuring civilians, and overwhelming services in those areas, and that the sources report that it is people in those areas who have been forced to move to the north of Lebanon to stay with other family members away from the bombing, although they also state that not everybody is that lucky. The sources report that in respect of those caught up in the conflict, the death toll as at around October 2024 was more than 2,200, there were over 10,000 injured, and some 1.2 million displaced across Lebanon, fleeing with almost nothing, with thousands crossing the border into northern Syria and on the border with Israel. They report [Town 1], where the applicant’s family home in southern Beirut was located, had been hit with [number] bombs obliterating residential buildings and likely killing countless civilians. In this regard I note the applicant has claimed his family’s property in Beirut is likely destroyed which I accept as plausible. As was noted at hearing the publications also indicate Hezbollah has been seriously weakened by the conflict. They report that Israel has killed a large number of Hezbollah senior leaders and commanders, as well as middle and lower-ranking members, decimating Hezbollah’s senior leadership, raising serious questions about Hezbollah’s role in Lebanese domestic politics going forward, that it was difficult to see Hezbollah spring back to normal anytime soon, the group was now weakened, and there were already calls to elect a new president not aligned in any meaningful way with Hezbollah. They also report[16] conditions in Lebanon have been adversely impacted by the conflict. The violence was pushing the already overwhelmed health system in Lebanon. The undermining of Hezbollah may reportedly lead to heightened instability and uncertainty. The applicant has also submitted that the influx of displaced people from the south has overwhelmed the north causing severe overcrowding, food shortages, skyrocketing prices, more limited access to essential goods and services, hospitals were overwhelmed, electricity sporadic, and security had deteriorated.

    [15] DFAT, 'DFAT Country Information Report: Lebanon', 26 June 2023, 20230626100419; HRW 'Human Rights Watch World Report 2023', 12 January 2023, 20230112144355; The World Bank,  'Lebanon Economic Monitor - Fall 2023 : In the Grip of a New Crisis', 21 December 2023, 20240208112536; ABC, ‘One month of war: Lebanese people across the world come together to help displaced’, 26 October 2024;  Foreign Affairs, ‘What the Lebanese people really think of Hezbollah’, 12 July 2024; UN News, ‘Lebanon Crisis: UN human rights office calls for probe into Israel Strike’, 15 October 2024; Reuters, ‘How Hezbollah is trying to counter Israel’s high-tech surveillance’, 9 July 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Could rival Lebanese factions exploit a weakened Hezbollah’, 30 September 2024; BBC, ‘Israel launches ground invasion in Lebanon’, 1 October 2024; BBC, ‘At least five killed in central Beirut air strike, as Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah facilities’, 30 September 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Mapping over a year of cross-border attacks between Israel and Lebanon’, 13 October 2024; Hanin Ghaddar et al, Mapping clashes along the Israel-Lebanon border, The Washington Institute (2024) < .

    [16] Foreign Affairs, ‘What the Lebanese people really think of Hezbollah’, 12 July 2024; ABC, ‘One month of war: Lebanese people across the world come together to help displaced’, 26 October 2024; UN News, ‘Lebanon Crisis: UN human rights office calls for probe into Israel Strike’, 15 October 2024; Reuters, ‘How Hezbollah is trying to counter Israel’s high-tech surveillance’, 9 July 2024; Aljazeera, ‘Could rival Lebanese factions exploit a weakened Hezbollah’, 30 September 2024; BBC, ‘Israel launches ground invasion in Lebanon’, 1 October 2024; BBC, ‘At least five killed in central Beirut air strike, as Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah facilities’, 30 September 2024.

1. As noted above I accept the applicant and his father are Sunni, his mother Shia, and when his parents entered their inter-sect marriage more than 30 years ago now, in [Country 1], they may have plausibly experienced some judgmental comments from family or close friends but overcame this with time, started a family and subsequently lived in in Beirut, a Shia dominated area, for some 13 years. I noted at hearing the even distribution and representation of faith, and the freedom of religion in Lebanon. In this regard the sources including DFAT report[17] that Lebanon officially recognises 18 religious groups including Shia and Sunni sects of Islam, the Constitution provides for freedom of religion, that there shall be just and equitable balance in the appointment of cabinet and high level civil service positions among the major religious groups, and that there is an almost even split between Shia, Sunni, and Christians in Lebanon (although some geographic areas are dominated by particular faiths/sects). The applicant said that was all on paper but that realistically the situation was very different, they had not been able to agree on a president, Hezbollah started the war in Lebanon, there was an explosion at the port, Hezbollah dominated Lebanon, and no one could do anything about that. As was noted at hearing his parents married a long time ago now, in [Country 1], recent country information reported[18] Lebanon had the most interreligious marriages per capita in the middle east, and I find it difficult to believe anyone in Lebanon would come to know or even have the time and energy to investigate and seek out information about his mother’s faith or his parent’s longstanding mixed-sect marriage. The applicant noted there was no security in Lebanon, that you were asked for identity documents everywhere you went and by government and your identity document stated your faith. I noted that the applicant’s faith was Sunni Islam and that his identity documents would show this, which he acknowledged. He said he was unable to enter some parts of Beirut in Christian areas. He also said there was a lot of discrimination as Christians did not want war or the Shia and Sunni war, so there were lots of problems and people did not want to see strangers in their areas. I noted that his parents’ marriage and his mother’s faith did not concern him directly it concerned his parents, and he said it was the same thing, and that if it affected his parents, it affected him. The applicant agreed that there were many interreligious marriages in Lebanon noting many used the civil marriage avenue but that they were still neglected by their families and then made some vague comments about  an historical sectarian war in Tripoli. I acknowledge DFAT’s[19] report that members of mixed sect marriages may experience relatively low level and localised societal discrimination in the form of harassment or ostracism from extended family.

   [17] Aljazeera, ‘Could rival Lebanese factions exploit a weakened Hezbollah’, 30 September 2024; DFAT 'DFAT Country Information Report: Lebanon', 26 June 2023, 20230626100419.

   [18] Lara Deeb, Love across difference – mixed marriage in Lebanon, (Stanford University Press, 2024).

   [19] DFAT 'DFAT Country Information Report: Lebanon', 26 June 2023, 20230626100419.

2. I noted at hearing that the north was reportedly Sunni dominated.[20] The applicant said that was correct but that there were also Christians there. As noted above, the applicant is a young Sunni male, and I consider that if he were to return, he would very likely return to Tripoli, a Sunni dominated area, where he has lived and worked in the past and has extended family and his father has a house some half an hour away. I accept that in the past in the north he had some verbal disputes with a particular local who caused him trouble because of his mother’s faith, felt some pressure from an extended family member to join the Salafi cause but was otherwise not harmed in the odd 2 years that he lived and worked there in the lead up to his departure for Australia in 2014. His [Brother A] also lived there until 2022 and there is no evidence of him having been physically harmed in that time. I note the applicant has never been involved with any groups or in any fighting and has clearly stated his opposition to this and has never been involved in gangs or rivalrous groups. While I accept the applicant’s parents are in an mixed-sect marriage as I noted at hearing this does not concern the applicant personally and he is of Sunni faith and it is difficult to see why anyone would know or try to find out about his mother’s faith after all these years. Based on the country information above noting of occasional communal violence, a decline in security as a result of the conflict, and the influx of people from the south to the north seeking safety, if the applicant were to return he may on occasion experience low level discrimination or harassment from other groups, including religious groups, in the form of verbal insults as a Sunni, however based on his profile, I am not satisfied this amounts of serious harm. For the reasons noted above I am also not satisfied that these circumstances amount to ‘significant harm’ as defined for the purposes of s 36(2A). There is not a real risk the applicant would be arbitrarily deprived of his life, the death penalty, or be subjected to torture, or cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment, or degrading treatment or punishment for the reasons claimed.

   [20] Ibid.

3. The applicant has made a series of claims regarding his wife and children in Australia including that they would return with him, that this would expose them to significant danger, that they would be deprived of basic human necessities, and relocating would be more difficult with them. He submitted that if he were to return without them it would disrupt his family, without him they would face financial strain, it would impact their mental health, and he would be unable to continue to run his successful business. As I noted at hearing, his wife and children in Australia are not applicants before me, and I can only take this evidence and claims into account to the extent it impacts on him. The applicant has also submitted that with no assets or support network and after 10 years outside Lebanon and given the conflict and conditions resulting from this that he believed he would struggle to survive in a country where the economy was failing. At hearing I noted the applicant is relatively young, educated, had worked in various capacities in the past, and there was nothing to indicate he could not work. As noted at hearing he has lived most of his life in Lebanon, where he has extended family, he has proven himself resourceful in travelling, living, studying, and working in Australia, where he has been entrepreneurial, despite the language barrier. The applicant said it was true that he had lived in Lebanon for a  long time, but that the only work he could find in Lebanon in the past was at the [shop], and he could not provide like he did in Australia, the currency no longer had any value, people were still being paid based on their old salaries, even a soldier in the army was only paid about $70 per month, and with a family a person would not be able to live. I noted at hearing that given his wife and children could remain in Australia (as noted above I accept his wife is an Australian citizen), and the conditions in Lebanon, I found it very difficult to believe they would return with him at this stage. The applicant reiterated that they would return with him but would find it difficult there and that his wife’s own family did not talk to her, he said they sort of disowned her because she left without them. He said when he was in Lebanon he applied for 50 jobs but did not receive even a single phone call at the time, but that in Australia you could find 50 jobs on the internet if you wanted, and that Australia was also safer.

4. I acknowledge that if the applicant were to return he may be separated from his family, at least for a period, however I note that separation from his family would not be for a s 5J(1)(a) reason and does not constitute significant harm.[21] At hearing when I raised issues in relation to the applicant’s generalised claims to fear harm on account of the conditions in Lebanon such as in relation to the economy, infrastructure, medical facilities, employment and security and how this might not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa, the applicant made a series of further brief generalised assertions, many unsupported by the country information and/or repetitive, about the north being targeted the week prior (I acknowledge there was an isolated and targeted reported airstrike in a town near Tripoli killing a Hamas commander and his family last year[22]), that there were no places in Lebanon that had not been targeted, that Christians were targeted by the Israelis, there was no economy, people were coming from the south, it was overcrowded with no education, the hospitals were shut, Lebanon was small and people were already confined, Hezbollah had moved into more areas of Lebanon, and many innocent victims had died as a result. As noted in the country information above however, Hezbollah is reportedly now a weakened force and people have been moving from the south to the north for safety as it is the south that has been targeted, and most affected in terms of infrastructure being damaged, people injured, and services stretched, although I acknowledge the influx of the displaced which places a strain on existing infrastructure and services and high unemployment and competition for work noted above in the country information. While the applicant may face high unemployment leading to initial delays in securing work, lower wages, higher costs, overcrowding, poorer infrastructure and services including medical, and pollution, and that these conditions may be inferior to that in Australia, as was noted at hearing, the country information does not indicate this somehow involves systematic or discriminatory conduct within the meaning of s 5J(4)(c), or a necessary intention within the meaning of s 36(2A).[23] Accordingly I am not satisfied the applicant faces a real chance of harm for the reasons claimed. ‘Real chance’ and ‘real risk’ involve the same standard. For the same reasons, I am also not satisfied the applicant faces a ‘real risk’ of significant harm.

   [21] SZRSN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] FMCA 78; SZRSN v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] FCA 751; GLD18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCAFC 2.

   [22] Aljazeera, ‘Israel air strike on northern Lebanon Kills Hamas commander and his family’, 5 October 2024; Hanin Ghaddar et al, Mapping clashes along the Israel-Lebanon border, The Washington Institute (2024) <

   [23] ss 5J(4)(c) and 36(2A) of the Act and EZC18 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 2143.

5. Having concluded that the applicant does not meet the refugee criterion in s 36(2)(a), the Tribunal has considered the alternative criterion in s 36(2)(aa). The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s 36(2)(aa).

6. At hearing I asked the applicant to tell me about his family’s relocation to Australia. He confirmed his parents and [number] siblings had moved to Australia in 2015 and were still in Australia. I pressed him for more detail such as how they entered Australia and how they were able to remain in Australia. He said they had applied for protection visas and that [one sibling] was an Australian citizen. Neither the applicant nor his representative said they had since been granted protection visas and no further evidence has been provided in this regard. There is no evidence before me to indicate a member of the same family unit as the applicant holds a protection visa and there is no evidence that the applicant satisfies s 36(2) on the basis of being a member of the same family unit as a person who satisfies s 36(2)(a) or (aa) and who holds a protection visa. Accordingly,  the applicant does not satisfy the criterion in s 36(2).

7. At hearing I noted that in light of the issues raised I may not find the applicant satisfies the criteria for a protection visa. I queried whether given the conflict in Lebanon, and that the applicant now had a family in Australia, he had thought about requesting referral for consideration by the Minister pursuant to s 351 of the Act. Section 351 of the Act gives the Minister a personal non-compellable discretion to substitute for a decision of the Tribunal another decision that is more favourable to the applicant if the Minister thinks it is in the public interest to do so. It did not appear that the applicant or his representative were aware of s 351 of the Act. His representative said that she would conduct further research into this. The representative advised she would seek instructions and that if they decided to proceed, they would provide the Tribunal with written submissions. I therefore provided them with just under 2 weeks in which to provide further written submissions, although to date none have been received. On the evidence before me it does appear that this case may have unique or exceptional circumstances within the meaning of the ‘Minister’s guidelines on ministerial powers (s 351, s 417 and s 501)’ (Guidelines) warranting referral. In this regard there may be strong compassionate circumstances that if not recognised would relevantly result in serious, ongoing, and irreversible harm and continuing hardship to an Australian family unit where at least one member of the family is an Australian citizen. As noted above I accept the applicant’s wife is an Australian citizen and I consider that if the applicant were to return to Lebanon that his family may not return with him. The applicant has submitted that if he were to return to Lebanon without his family this would have devastating impacts on them, as he supports them emotionally and financially, his wife stays at home to care for the young children, and that his absence would have long lasting and serious impacts on the children’s development, including emotionally and psychologically. The Tribunal will therefore refer the matter to the Department for their consideration. As an aside I also note that at hearing the applicant advised his wife was an Australian citizen and that he was awaiting the outcome of the review before applying for a Partner Visa. While this is not relevant to the review, the Guidelines indicate this might tend against referral depending on the sort of Partner Visa requested, any relevant conditions, and the circumstances of past applications, if any. I have no other information or documents in relation to his wife, their marriage, the children, or visas other than the protection visa the subject of this review, and as a preliminary, the Department may wish to make further inquiries with the applicant in relation to these matters.

   DECISION

8. The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.

   Date of hearing: 29 October 2024

   Representative for the applicant: Ms Salma Soueid

   ATTACHMENT  -  Extract from Migration Act 1958

   5 (1) Interpretation

   …

   cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment means an act or omission by which:

   (a)     severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person; or

   (b)     pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person so long as, in all the circumstances, the act or omission could reasonably be regarded as cruel or inhuman in nature;

   but does not include an act or omission:

   (c)     that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or

   (d)     arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.

   …

   degrading treatment or punishment means an act or omission that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation which is unreasonable, but does not include an act or omission:

   (a)     that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or

   (b)     that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.

   …

   torture means an act or omission by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person:

   (a)     for the purpose of obtaining from the person or from a third person information or a confession; or

   (b)     for the purpose of punishing the person for an act which that person or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed; or

   (c)     for the purpose of intimidating or coercing the person or a third person; or

   (d)     for a purpose related to a purpose mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or (c); or

   (e)     for any reason based on discrimination that is inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant;

   but does not include an act or omission arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.

   …

   receiving country,  in relation to a non-citizen, means:

   (a)     a country of which the non-citizen is a national, to be determined solely by reference to the law of the relevant country; or

   (b)     if the non-citizen has no country of nationality—a country of his or her former habitual residence, regardless of whether it would be possible to return the non-citizen to the country.

   …

   5H    Meaning of refugee

   (1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person in Australia, the person is a refugee if the person is:

   (a)     in a case where the person has a nationality – is outside the country of his or her nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country; or

   (b)     in a case where the person does not have a nationality – is outside the country of his or her former habitual residence and owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to return to it.

   Note:     For the meaning of well-founded fear of persecution, see section 5J.

   …

   5J     Meaning of well-founded fear of persecution

   (1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person has a well-founded fear of persecution if:

   (a)     the person fears being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion; and

   (b)     there is a real chance that, if the person returned to the receiving country, the person would be persecuted for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (a); and

   (c)     the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of a receiving country.

   Note:     For membership of a particular social group, see sections 5K and 5L.

   (2)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country.

   Note:     For effective protection measures, see section 5LA.

   (3)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if the person could take reasonable steps to modify his or her behaviour so as to avoid a real chance of persecution in a receiving country, other than a modification that would:

   (a)     conflict with a characteristic that is fundamental to the person’s identity or conscience; or

   (b)     conceal an innate or immutable characteristic of the person; or

   (c)     without limiting paragraph (a) or (b), require the person to do any of the following:

   (i)alter his or her religious beliefs, including by renouncing a religious conversion, or conceal his or her true religious beliefs, or cease to be involved in the practice of his or her faith;

   (ii)conceal his or her true race, ethnicity, nationality or country of origin;

   (iii)alter his or her political beliefs or conceal his or her true political beliefs;

   (iv)conceal a physical, psychological or intellectual disability;

   (v)enter into or remain in a marriage to which that person is opposed, or accept the forced marriage of a child;

   (vi)alter his or her sexual orientation or gender identity or conceal his or her true sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status.

   (4)If a person fears persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a):

   (a)     that reason must be the essential and significant reason, or those reasons must be the essential and significant reasons, for the persecution; and

   (b)     the persecution must involve serious harm to the person; and

   (c)     the persecution must involve systematic and discriminatory conduct.

   (5)Without limiting what is serious harm for the purposes of paragraph (4)(b), the following are instances of serious harm for the purposes of that paragraph:

   (a)     a threat to the person’s life or liberty;

   (b)     significant physical harassment of the person;

   (c)     significant physical ill‑treatment of the person;

   (d)     significant economic hardship that threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;

   (e)     denial of access to basic services, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;

   (f)     denial of capacity to earn a livelihood of any kind, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist.

   (6)In determining whether the person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), any conduct engaged in by the person in Australia is to be disregarded unless the person satisfies the Minister that the person engaged in the conduct otherwise than for the purpose of strengthening the person’s claim to be a refugee.

   5K    Membership of a particular social group consisting of family

   For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person (the first person), in determining whether the first person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for the reason of membership of a particular social group that consists of the first person’s family:

   (a)     disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced, where the reason for the fear or persecution is not a reason mentioned in paragraph 5J(1)(a); and

   (b)     disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that:

   (i)the first person has ever experienced; or

   (ii)any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced;

   where it is reasonable to conclude that the fear or persecution would not exist if it were assumed that the fear or persecution mentioned in paragraph (a) had never existed.

   Note:     Section 5G may be relevant for determining family relationships for the purposes of this section.

   5L    Membership of a particular social group other than family

   For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person is to be treated as a member of a particular social group (other than the person’s family) if:

   (a)     a characteristic is shared by each member of the group; and

   (b)     the person shares, or is perceived as sharing, the characteristic; and

   (c)     any of the following apply:

   (i)the characteristic is an innate or immutable characteristic;

   (ii)the characteristic is so fundamental to a member’s identity or conscience, the member should not be forced to renounce it;

   (iii)the characteristic distinguishes the group from society; and

   (d)     the characteristic is not a fear of persecution.

   5LA Effective protection measures

   (1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country if:

   (a)     protection against persecution could be provided to the person by:

   (i)the relevant State; or

   (ii)a party or organisation, including an international organisation, that controls the relevant State or a substantial part of the territory of the relevant State; and

   (b)     the relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (a) is willing and able to offer such protection.

   (2)A relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (1)(a) is taken to be able to offer protection against persecution to a person if:

   (a)     the person can access the protection; and

   (b)     the protection is durable; and

   (c)     in the case of protection provided by the relevant State—the protection consists of an appropriate criminal law, a reasonably effective police force and an impartial judicial system.

   …

   36     Protection visas – criteria provided for by this Act

   …

   (2)A criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is:

   (a)     a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee; or

   (aa)  a non-citizen in Australia (other than a non-citizen mentioned in paragraph (a)) in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the non-citizen being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that the non-citizen will suffer significant harm; or

   (b)     a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:

   (i)is mentioned in paragraph (a); and

   (ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant; or

   (c)     a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:

   (i)is mentioned in paragraph (aa); and

   (ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant.

   (2A)A non‑citizen will suffer significant harm if:

   (a)     the non‑citizen will be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life; or

   (b)     the death penalty will be carried out on the non‑citizen; or

   (c)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to torture; or

   (d)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment; or

   (e)     the non‑citizen will be subjected to degrading treatment or punishment.

   (2B)However, there is taken not to be a real risk that a non‑citizen will suffer significant harm in a country if the Minister is satisfied that:

   (a)     it would be reasonable for the non‑citizen to relocate to an area of the country where there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or

   (b)     the non‑citizen could obtain, from an authority of the country, protection such that there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or

   (c)     the real risk is one faced by the population of the country generally and is not faced by the non‑citizen personally.

   …