2009031 (Refugee)

This case concerned an application for protection visas by the first to fifth-named applicants, who are citizens of Albania. The applicants claimed they feared persecution due to an alleged ongoing blood feud and a historical land dispute with a family identified as [Family 1]. The core of the dispute stemmed from an incident in 1916 involving the applicants' great-grandfather and a member of [Family 1] being killed. The applicants alleged subsequent threats and physical assaults, including an incident in 1996 and another at a border crossing in 2014, as well as a fire at their family apartment. The decision was made by the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as refugees, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as persons facing a real risk of significant harm if returned to Albania (the complementary protection criterion). This required the Tribunal to assess the credibility of the applicants' claims regarding the blood feud and land dispute, and to consider the availability of state protection in Albania. The Tribunal also had to consider the weight to be given to documentary evidence, such as certificates from reconciliation committees, in light of concerns about their authenticity.

The Tribunal found that while a historical land dispute existed, it was not convinced that this dispute had escalated into an ongoing blood feud or that the applicants faced a real risk of harm from [Family 1]. The Tribunal noted the significant passage of time since the initial incident in 1916, the lack of any subsequent deaths or credible threats, and the applicants' own actions, such as returning to Albania and living comfortably in Tirana, which were inconsistent with a genuine fear of persecution. Furthermore, the Tribunal expressed serious concerns about the reliability of certificates from reconciliation committees, citing credible reports of fraudulent documents being issued in Albania for asylum purposes. The Tribunal concluded that the applicants had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visas to the applicants. However, the Tribunal decided to refer the matter to the Minister for consideration under section 417 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), noting that the third to fifth-named applicants were minors and their applications were dependent on others. The Tribunal also highlighted the third-named applicant's status as an elite athlete in Australia as a potential factor for the Minister's consideration regarding public interest.