2006668 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Fiji, sought a protection visa in Australia. The dispute concerned whether Australia had protection obligations towards the applicant under either the "refugee" criterion or "complementary protection" grounds. The applicant arrived in Australia in February 2014 and lodged his protection visa application on 19 July 2019. The decision under review was made by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as a refugee, or under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Fiji. The Tribunal was also required to consider if the applicant was a member of the same family unit as a person who met these criteria, pursuant to sections 36(2)(b) and (c).

The Tribunal considered the applicant's stated reasons for leaving Fiji, which included seeking broader life experiences and career development, and his assertion that there was "nothing happened if I returned to that country," despite acknowledging terrible crime and poverty. The applicant had also ticked "No" to experiencing harm in Fiji on his application form, although he later indicated that authorities could not protect him due to the targeting of workers and trade unionists, and that the economic situation prevented internal relocation. The Tribunal applied Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines, assessing the applicant's claims against Fiji as his country of nationality and receiving country.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa. It found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), as there was no suggestion he met the refugee or complementary protection criteria, nor was he a family member of someone who did.