2011508 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an appeal by applicants, citizens of Fiji, against a decision affirming the refusal of their protection visas. The applicants arrived in Australia in December 2019, claiming they faced hardship in Fiji and sought to improve their children's opportunities. They admitted to coming to Australia for a holiday and to seek a visa to remain, having been advised by a friend that this was an easy process. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa, including the complementary protection criterion.

The legal issues before the Tribunal included whether the applicants faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Fiji, as contemplated by section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This involved assessing whether the first applicant's past employment with the Fijian government and his alleged witnessing of corruption constituted a fear of persecution based on political opinion. The Tribunal also considered the status of the third applicant, who had arrived in Australia prior to the rest of the family and was living independently with a partner, and whether he should have lodged his own protection claim.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the first applicant claimed to have witnessed the misuse of financial resources within the Fijian government and feared repercussions for expressing his views, there was no evidence that he had publicly criticised the Fijian government while in Australia or intended to do so upon return. The media articles submitted, dating back over a decade, were not considered to have a substantive link to the applicant's personal protection claim. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the third applicant was no longer a dependent and had been employed throughout his stay in Australia, living apart from his family, and therefore should have lodged his own claim for protection. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visas.