2100552 (Refugee) - [2024] ARTA 537

2100552 (REFUGEE) [2024] ARTA 537 (23 OCTOBER 2024)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Representative: Mr Emil Kalouch (MARN: 0637601)
Respondent:Minister for Home Affairs

Tribunal Number: 2100552
Tribunal:Alicia Bills
Date:23 October 2024

Place:Adelaide
Decision:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and remits the application for a protection visa for reconsideration, in accordance with the order that the applicant meets the following criteria:
·s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Statement made on 23 October 2024 at 8:48am
CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Lebanon – political opinion and religion – anti-Hezbollah – brothers and cousin members of Hezbollah – pressure to join, threats, attacks and house partly burned – family harassed and questioned and son photographed being threatened – Sunni Muslim who appreciates aspects of Christianity and has Christian symbol tattoo – questioned on previous returns from working in other countries – country information – Hezbollah now controls airport and internal security and monitors arrivals – no effective protection measures – decision under review remitted
LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5H(1)(a), 5J(1), 36(2)(a), 65
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2
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

This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 24 December 2020 to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).
The applicant who claims to be a national of Lebanon, applied for the visa on 1 November 2019. The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant is not a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations.
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 25 September 2024 and on 17 October 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from the applicant’s wife [Ms A]. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Arabic and English languages.
The applicant was represented in relation to the review. The representative attended the Tribunal hearing.
BACKGROUND
The applicant was born in [Town 1], an area close to Tripoli, in North Lebanon. The applicant is currently [Age] years of age.
The applicant travelled to Australia in August 2019 on an apparently genuine Lebanese passport, a copy of which is contained in the material before the Tribunal. The applicant has at all times maintained that he is a citizen of Lebanon. The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a national of Lebanon and has assessed his claims against Lebanon as his country of nationality and the receiving country.
Evidence before the Department
Protection visa application
In November 2019 the applicant lodged an application for a protection visa.
In his protection visa application the applicant stated the following as his reasons for leaving Lebanon and claiming protection in Australia:
Provide reasons why this applicant left that country:
I left the country for fear for my life Becasue of my political opinion and my religious beliefs. Although I am a muslim man yet i have the [Christian symbol] on my [body part] becasue o believe in Christianity and the power of mercy that come with it. as such i have been at odds with my father before he passed and then with my brother and cousins and other related family members who see me as a person who is abandoning islam and that is extremely shameful in a country that is rife with religious fervour even though people do not admeit to it.
furthermore having seen countries outside of lebanon and seeing what has happened in Lebanon for the past few years i have developed a fear from belonging to any political party especially ones affiliated with religion, this particular stance did not sit well with my brother and cousins ( [Mr B] ands [Mr C])who are devoted to Hizbulla and followers of [Mr D] in an area dominated by Sunni Muslims. My other cousin [Mr E]) is a memeber of the mustaqbal party. there was a point where my colusin accused me of trying to hurt him to put pressure on me to join his party , on the other hand my brother and 2 cousins burned down a part of my house to force me with them , my children and wife had to suffer becasue of that and had to fleefhand to other relatives for fear. they could not believe nor I that blood relations such as my brother and cousins would try and harm them becasue of my not following them. they tried to force my hand as has been happening for a while. when my father was alive he was so furious with me becasue i did not follow his political opinion and the fact that i had a christian religious sign on my [body part].
I am so afraid for myself and my immediate family and feel shame and deep terror from the fact tat othe family memebers and their followers and cohorts are after me to hurt me . I cannot understand how a brother and cousins can forgo a blood relation for blind follwing of a political party that has brought lebanon nothing but trouble.
my broter affiliation and that of my cusins alos had put me in danger from salafi followers such as people who believed in Daesh and thise also threatend me becasue of thsi affiliation and ecasue they had branded me a Murtad, meaning a person who is abndoning Islam, and that in Islam is acrime punishable by death. I have extreme fear from being In Lebanon for myself and my family
Did this applicant experience harm in that country?
Yes I did , I was beaten and treatened and my house was burned by family memers loyal to parties i would never adhere to. I was threatened and so were my wife and children becasue of my beliefs, religious and political. I was harnmed in order to scare me into following ideologies i believe to be destructive and inhuman.
Did this applicant seek help within the country after the harm?
No. The hurtful part in my dilemma is that when a person has problems the first eople he goes to are his family. in my case i cannot do that becasue my family are the ones who are causing me fear and hurt, therefore i can definitely seek n help from them, furthermore my cousin is the head of council in my town and as such he has control over the police in there, noit that they can be of any help as firstly they would not interffere fpr fear of being banded and second they always find a way not to help branding the issues between me and my family, family issues and as such thet do not ntervene. I am sincerly between a rock and a hard place and have no one to help me or fend for me and my family. as such i am fearful from the authorities tjemselves becasue if i sought their help , even though i would know its not coming, it will exasperate my problem as they woud have to contact the people i am seeking help from and that would be tantamount to suicide as they are my family and 2 things are in play, loyalty to family that is nt tere and as such i would be punished severly for complaining about family and destroying their hounour and secondly i would be opening my cards of not wanting to belong to any party and as such i would be branded and a target for all from both sides.
Did this applicant move, or try to move, to another part of that country to seek safety?
Yes, tried to move my family to ome relaties as we know no one else, and lebanon is a small country and the people that are after me a very powerful and they can find me anywhere and that is why i left for Australia to seek help. eventhough i am burning inside for my family especailly with what is happening nowadays in lebanon
Explain what the applicant thinks will happen to them if they return to that country:
I would be killed for sure and no one would try and protect me
Does this applicant think they will be harmed or mistreated if they return to that country?
Yes I will fr the reasons i have listed above and for the fct that the coutry is currently on knife edge when it comes to affiliations and followings, my issues are exactly that and becasue of it i really fear for my life
Does this applicant think the authorities of that country can and will protect this applicant if they go back?
Absolutely not, i do not believe the authorities can or will help me for that matter. the reason being their hands are tied and no matter how much glory and honesty i would like to attribute to them , yet in cases like mine they would not be abe to lift a finger. furthermore, i would be vert scared of approaching them in the first place as i believe my tormentors would immediately know and by doing so i would add to the hatred against me and make myself a bigger target
Does this applicant think they would be able to relocate within that country to an area where they would not be harmed?
Absolutely not, where to in Lebanon, such a ver smal country and where eople from an area would be very weary from others entering their arae, especially against powerful militian and people who are afer me.
Representative submissions – December 2020
In early December 2020, prior to his interview with the delegate, the applicant’s representative provided written submissions to the Department. Part of the submissions include the following:
Since October 2019 Hezbollah has threatened and beat up on Lebanese citizens in their own country who have been demonstrating against the government, that is being supported and held in place by Hezbollah, because it suits its purposes and it keeps it in the position of highest power in the land. It has no regard to the law as it behaves that it is above the law and its members and organizations are irreproachable and even if the were no one would dare object to them or contradict them otherwise they would be hurt, kidnapped or killed, without fear of retribution.
The applicant sincerely fears that he would be persecuted by Hezbollah in Lebanon, and strange as it may seems we cannot name who is an agent to the other Hezbollah to the government in Lebanon or vice versa, the important part is both constitute a huge and rea risk to the applicant and the harm is fatal and real and cannot be discounted especially these days where Hezbollah is mentioned nearly in every part of the world as an instigator of terror, let alone in Lebanon where it rules with not only an iron fist but with iron weapons and iron men that have no morals or no issues in beating and killing in the name of Hezbollah to bolster their grip and their sense of power which they generate by terror.
The applicant would be killed in Lebanon because of his political views, which he sees fair, but others see as antagonistic to their ideas and existence, the chance is real and almost certain and the fear is real and certain.
Interview with delegate – December 2020
In December 2020, the applicant participated in an interview with a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs.
Delegate’s decision – December 2020
In their decision record dated 24 December 2020 the delegate accepted that the applicant’s brother and maternal cousins were members of Hezbollah. The delegate accepted that at times the applicant’s brother and maternal cousins may have attempted to convince the applicant to join Hezbollah. The delegate did not accept that the applicant had been threatened or harmed by his brother or maternal cousins.
Evidence before the Tribunal
Representative submissions – September 2024
In September 2024, prior to the Tribunal hearing, the applicant’s representative provided written submissions to the Tribunal. Part of the submissions include the following:
The applicant maintains that he is in danger of being killed in Lebanon for imputed political opinion and religious grounds, he is more scared and even more sure that he in in graver danger today than the day he lodged his protection visa application because of the incredible deterioration of the security situation in Lebanon due to the rapid escalating tensions between Hezbollah and Israel that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people in Lebanon and the destruction of thousands of buildings and other infrastructure.
In a country that has not had a president for more than 2 years now because Hezbollah and its allies want to force their own candidate in Lebanon, sectarian division is rife on religious markers and political markers. The principal of “if you’re not with me, then you’re against me” is very much alive in Lebanon.
The applicant’s wish was to be granted protection in Australia so that he is able to extract his family from Lebanon and have them live a decent life without fear, he is justified in doing so because his brother has sent him a photo of his son holding a rifle as if to taunt him and in a way sending him a message that his son might be the one who will join Hezbollah and put himself in extreme danger as we have explained above.
The applicant totally believes that he would be a target for killing in Lebanon and certainly believes that he would be discriminated against because of his religious beliefs and his lack of affiliation to any particular group, usually he would be considered neutral, yet in Lebanon he would be considered a traitor. The applicant’s life and well being is in serious jeopardy because he is in the middle of a struggle led by family members some of whom are Hezbollah followers while others are not and are followers of the Mustaqbal movement, which is at great odds with Hezbollah policies. And anyone in Lebanon who is not to Hezbollah side is being considered by them as an agent for Israel and as such would be a target for humiliation, discrimination and death.
In addition to that, the applicant believes and rightly so, that the authorities in Lebanon will not be able to help him because he believes as most of the world does that Lebanon is not governed by a government of the people, it is actually ruled by Hezbollah that has driven it to despair and war with neighbouring countries and it is suffering ultimately by daily death and destruction.
Tribunal hearing – September 2024
The applicant gave the following evidence at the Tribunal hearing on 25 September 2024:
a.He was born and grew up in [Town 1].
b.He completed primary school but did not attend any further schooling.
c.The applicant has [siblings]. One of the applicant’s [siblings] lives in Australia but his remaining siblings live in or around [Town 1]. The applicant maintains contact with his [sibling] in Australia but does not have any contact with his siblings in Lebanon.
d.The applicant’s parents are both deceased. His mother died approximately 12 years ago and his father died approximately 7 years ago.
e.In 2005 the applicant married [Ms A]. The applicant and his wife have [children]. They have [genders, names and ages].
f.The applicant’s wife and children live in [Town 2], Lebanon. The applicant speaks to his wife and children daily, sometime two or three times each day.
g.After the applicant married his wife, his father bought a new family house. The applicant then bought the existing home from his father. For a period of time the applicant and his wife rented a home whilst they were renovating the house.
h.During his twenties and his thirties the applicant spent time out of Lebanon working in other countries including [Countries 1-5]. During these times abroad, the applicant’s wife and children remained living in Lebanon. On each occasion when the applicant returned to Lebanon he was questioned at the airport and then released.
i.One of the applicant’s brothers, namely [Mr F], is a member of Hezbollah and has been since his early twenties. After he joined Hezbollah the applicant’s brother repeatedly pressured the applicant to join Hezbollah. The applicant would lie to his brother stating that he would join Hezbollah after he finished working overseas. The applicant does not support Hezbollah and never had any intention of joining them.
j.When the applicant’s father was alive, the applicant’s brother did not bother the applicant as much, but after his father died, his brother started to cause trouble. After he travelled to Australia the applicant’s brother harassed his wife and children. The applicant arranged for his wife and children to move from [Town 1] to [Town 2].
k.The applicant identifies as a Sunni Muslim. He was raised in Sunni Muslim family. His siblings identify as Sunni Muslim. The applicant’s wife and children identify as Sunni Muslim.
l.The applicant appreciates aspects of Christianity. As a teenager, the applicant would play football with Muslim friends and Christian friends in the church yard. The applicant considered that his Christian friends had no
issues, no problems and no conflict. The applicant considered that Christian values supported peace and love.
m.When the applicant was approximately 14 or 15 years of age, he had a tattoo of a [design] and a Christian [symbol] done on his [body part]. The applicant liked the shape of the [symbol]. The applicant does not identify as a Christian. The applicant has not ever attended at a church.
n.The applicant identifies as a Muslim, but appreciates certain values of Christianity. The applicant once told his father that he appreciated Christianity and stated that he liked them because they don’t cause troubles. The applicant’s father told him to shut up. The applicant’s siblings and father were upset by the tattoo and told the applicant to burn it off. The applicant has never removed the tattoo because he maintains his appreciation of Christian values.
o.The applicant travelled to Australia in August 2019 on a three month tourist visa. When the applicant did not return to Lebanon his family questioned his wife about his whereabouts. The applicant’s wife informed his family that the applicant was seeking political asylum in Australia.
p.The applicant’s brother harassed and threatened the applicant’s wife. On one occasion the applicant’s brother forced the applicant’s wife to provide the applicant’s Australian phone number to him. The applicant’s brother held a gun to the head of the applicant’s wife stating that she must give him the applicant’s phone number or else she would be shot.
q.The applicant’s brother then sent a photograph of himself and the applicant’s son to the applicant. In the photograph the applicant’s son was carrying a rifle. The applicant’s brother left the applicant a voice message stating that if the applicant has fled to Australia, then they would take his son in his place to join Hezbollah.
r.Following this incident, the applicant decided to move his wife and children to [Town 2]. When the applicant’s brother learned that the applicant was going to smuggle his wife and children out of [Town 1], he burned part of their house down and shot at the house.
s.The applicant’s brother is aware of where the applicant’s wife and children are but has not bothered them lately because he is too busy.
t.If the applicant returns to Lebanon he would be taken from the airport to prison. In Lebanon they would consider the applicant an apostate and would think he is working for Israel. The applicant’s name would be at the airport written in red by Hezbollah. Hezbollah control the airport.
u.The applicant fears that if he returned to Lebanon he would face harm from his brother, or an agent of his brother because of his decision to leave Lebanon and not support Hezbollah. The applicant fears the harm could amount to torturing or killing him.
Photographs of the applicant’s son
In October 2024, prior to the second hearing, the applicant provided the Tribunal with two photographs.
One photograph depicted a male child holding a firearm. The other photograph depicted two male children holding firearms with a male adult behind them.
Article: ‘Concerns increase over Hizbullah control of Beirut airport’

In October 2024, prior to the second hearing, the applicant provided the Tribunal with an article which stated the following:
Security experts say Hizbullah has had near total control over Beirut’s Rafik Hariri International Airport since 2008, and monitors every movement through cameras placed in and around the airport.
”Hizbullah acts on the belief that it has permanent control over land, sea and air borders” said security expert Brig. Gen. (ret) Naji Malaeb.
It monitors and tightly controls all activities at Beirut airport, he said.
The airport is situated in the southern suburbs of Beirut, near Hizbullah’s stronghold, which makes monitoring and controlling it mor convenient for the party.[1]
Statement of [Ms A]
[1] Concerns increase over Hizbullah control of Beirut airport; Al-Mashareq; 11 October 2024
In October 2024, prior to the second hearing, the applicant provided the Tribunal with a letter from his wife. Relevant parts of the letter are as follows:
The situation in Lebanon now is miserable and very dangerous, there is no safe place because of the Israeli attacks on Lebanon as a result of Hezbollah’s intervention in the war on Gaza.
This intervention has pushed Lebanon in a dangerous war and harmful for the Lebanese, but that is the situation in Lebanon, in past years Hezbollah pushed Lebanon in a needless war in 2006 and after that he supported Bachar Al Assad in Syria which forced a lot of Syrians to enter Lebanon…
In addition to that and what concerns us personally, my brother in law [Mr F] is a member of Hezbollah and he tried many times to have my husband join him, but my husband refused which caused tough problems with him, and my husband refusal to submit to him made him a target, which forced him to flee to Australia and forced me and my children to move to a different place to live to the [Town 2] region, especially since my brother in law started in a way or another to pressure my husband and that by taking photos of my son [Master G] holding a weapon and that to threaten my husband more and more.
My husband [the applicant] is a very peaceful man and a very simple man who believes in peace and love, he even has a tattoo of a [symbol] on his [body part] because of his belief that the Christian religion is a peaceful and safe religion and he is proud of that, he never tried to remove it to the contrary he always defended this tattoo and that pushed him into many troubles with his society and his relatives and even with that he did not waiver.
Tribunal hearing – October 2024
The applicant’s wife [Ms A] gave the following evidence at the Tribunal hearing on 17 October 2024:
a.[Ms A] and the applicant were married in 2005. They have [children].
b.The applicant has [siblings], including the applicant. The applicant’s family identify as Sunni Muslims.
c.[Ms A] identifies as a Sunni Muslim. The applicant leans more towards Christianity. He has a tattoo of a [symbol] on his [body part]. The applicant supports love and peace.
d.The applicant grew up in [Town 1]. During their marriage, the applicant often worked abroad, including in [Countries 1-4].
e.The applicant’s brother [Mr F] is a member of Hezbollah. He has probably been a member of Hezbollah for at least 15 years.
f.[Ms A] is aware that [Mr F] would pressure the applicant to join Hezbollah because he would come home feeling anxious and angry and tell her about the conversations he had had with his brother. The applicant was worried that his brother would try and include their children. The applicant never wanted to join Hezbollah.
g.[Ms A] has viewed [Mr F] as a family problem. [Ms A] and the applicant do not tell their children that the applicant’s brother is a member of Hezbollah because they do not want to worry the children and affect the mental health of the children. [Ms A] and the applicant try to avoid [Mr F] as much as possible but they have had to see him from time to time because he is family. It is very hard to completely avoid him. [Ms A] ensures she is present on the rare times they have seen him.
h.Since the applicant has been in Australia, [Ms A] has barely seen [Mr F]. Approximately four years ago, [Ms A] and her children were at that [Mr F]’s house and [Mr F] brought out his guns and made her son and her son’s cousin pose with various guns. He took photographs of them. [Mr F] then held a gun to [Ms A]’s head and demanded she give [Mr F] the applicant’s phone number. [Ms A] knew that this was so that [Mr F] could try and drag the applicant in to joining Hezbollah by sending him the photograph.
i.On another occasion [Ms A] returned home from dropping her children to school and discovered part of her house had been burned down. [Ms A] is suspicious that [Mr F] did it because she does not have any enemies, she lives in peace.
j.Since that occasion [Ms A] has had to stand up to protect her children’s safety. [Ms A] moved the family to [Town 2].
k.The applicant came to Australia to seek protection from his brother and from Hezbollah. If the applicant returned to Lebanon he might be killed or kidnapped because [Mr F] and Hezbollah are waiting for the applicant. The applicant has rejected the offer to join Hezbollah.
l.The applicant previously travelled and worked abroad to avoid the pressure from his brother to join Hezbollah.
Country information
After the applicant’s wife had given evidence, the Tribunal discussed with the applicant and considered the following general country information in relation to Lebanon.
The Tribunal observed that the situation in Lebanon had changed significantly since the applicant left Lebanon in 2019.
DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon - June 2023
RECENT HISTORY
2.3 Since the end of the civil war, Lebanon’s recent history has been characterised by instability and economic and political crises ... Other crises included an Israeli invasion and conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006, and a Hezbollah takeover of west Beirut in 2008. Frustration with tax increases, corruption and sectarian rule led to mass protests in 2019. The civil war in neighbouring Syria that commenced in 2011 drove 1.5 million refugees into Lebanon, which Lebanon has struggled to absorb.
2.4 A large-scale chemical explosion in August 2020 destroyed the Port of Beirut when a fire in an adjacent warehouse ignited nearly 3,000 tons of ammonium nitrate. Two-hundred and twenty people died and more than 6,500 were injured. Many Lebanese blamed the explosion on political dysfunction. Mass protests broke out and then-Prime Minister Hassan Diab and his entire cabinet resigned.
2.5 Since 2020, Lebanon has experienced a severe economic crisis (see Economic Overview). On 31 October 2022, President Michael Aoun left office at the end of his presidential term. As at publication, the country’s parliamentarians, divided along sectarian lines, have failed to elect Aoun's successor, despite 10 rounds of voting.[2]
[2] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 8
ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
2.7 Lebanon is experiencing severe economic depression … Long-running public debt has become unsustainable.
2.8 … The currency has been sharply devalued, inflation is very high (over 150 per cent in 2021) and some people have been unable to access savings or afford basic goods and services.
2.9 Supply of basic goods including medicines, food and fuel is unpredictable, and they are sometimes rationed. Subsidies that were applied to these goods were mostly lifted as the economic crisis deepened and many Lebanese who relied on subsidies have been left without access to these goods.
2.10 Poverty rates have doubled since 2019 … There is little in the way of social welfare.[3]
[3] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 9
Employment
2.12 High levels of unemployment stem from the wider economic crisis. Power cuts and a lack of fuel have meant that some businesses cannot operate or have had to scale back operations. State-supplied power is sporadic and often doesn’t exceed two hours per day, leaving much of the population reliant on privately-owned diesel backup generators to make up the shortfall.[4]
[4] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 9
Health
2.15 The system has been badly affected by the recent economic crisis. The economic crisis has affected supply chains for pharmaceuticals and basic medical supplies, which are often unavailable. According to Bertelsmann Stiftung, about half of the Lebanese population cannot access healthcare. Even those who can access healthcare are not always able to access medicines, which are either unavailable or very expensive.[5]
[5] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 10
SECURITY SITUATION
2.31 Lebanon’s security situation is uncertain due to conflict in neighbouring Syria, tensions between Hezbollah (which is part of the Lebanese Government) and Israel, terrorist threats from internal and external actors, and, occasionally, communal violence.[6]
[6] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 13
RELIGION
3.15 Lebanon officially recognises 18 religious groups. These include four Muslim groups (Shi’a, Sunni, Alawites, and Ismailis); 12 Christian groups (Maronites, Greek Orthodox, Greek Catholics, Armenian Orthodox, Armenian Catholics, Syriac Orthodox, Syriac Catholics, Nestorian Assyrians, Chaldeans, Copts, Latin [Roman] Catholics, and Evangelicals); Druze (a religion that combines traditional Islamic teachings with certain philosophical ideas and mystic practices); and Jews.
3.18 ... Estimates endorsed by the US Department of State are that 69.3 per cent of the citizen population is Muslim (31.2 per cent Sunni, 32 per cent Shi’a, and a small percentage are Alawites and Ismailis); 30.7 per cent of the population is Christian; and 5.5 per cent of the population is Druze. The remainder consists of small communities of other faiths.
3.19 With the exception of Beirut, most cities do not contain communities from all major religions. Different religious groups tend to be concentrated in particular areas:
- Most Sunnis are concentrated in West Beirut, and the governorates of North Lebanon and South Lebanon. North Lebanon is majority Sunni with a substantial Christian population in the south and east. There is also a small Shi’a population in the north-east of the governorate, contiguous with the northern part of Beka’a governorate.
- The Shi’a community is concentrated in southern Lebanon, Beirut’s southern suburbs, and the northern half of the Beka’a governorate. Beka’a governorate is approximately half Shi’a, with a substantial Christian population in the capital, Zahle, and smaller populations of Sunnis in the north-east and Druze in the south.
- Maronite Christians are concentrated in Mount Lebanon governorate, and in Beirut and its surrounds. Beirut governorate has substantial Christian, Sunni, and Shi’a populations. The city has both mixed suburbs and religiously-based enclaves.
- South Lebanon governorate and Nabatiyeh governorate are both majority Shi’a, but have a mixed population that includes Sunnis, Christians, and Druze.
3.22 Human rights observers report that relationships between religious groups in Lebanon are generally peaceful. Interreligious dialogue between religious leaders and communities occurs.
3.23 DFAT assesses that members of recognised religious groups do not face official discrimination on religious grounds. Members of recognised religious groups who reside in areas where they are a minority may face low-level societal discrimination, however this is unlikely to include violence. [7]
[7] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Pages 16 - 18
Critics of Hezbollah
3.35 Hezbollah is a prominent Lebanese Shi’a organisation comprising political and social elements, as well as a military wing. Hezbollah is listed as a terrorist organisation by a number of nations, including Australia. While its primary support base is overwhelmingly in the Shi’a community, Hezbollah has a strong national presence (though its bloc lost its majority in the 2022 parliamentary elections) ... It maintains an armed wing with military strength believed to exceed that of the Lebanese Armed Forces (see Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF)). Supported by Iran, the organisation draws much of its popular support from its opposition to Israel: Hezbollah and Israel fought a month-long war in Lebanon in 2006 (see Recent History). Hezbollah runs its own economic, financial, and social services institutions; and has its own judicial and internal security structures, including detention centres (see Detention and Prison). It is a powerful player in Lebanon’s economy, politics, and media.
3.36 Hezbollah exercises effective control over parts of Lebanese territory, particularly in South Lebanon, southern Beirut, and parts of the Beka’a Valley: interlocutors have reported that, in these areas, Hezbollah’s influence and control exceeds that of the Lebanese state.
3.37 According the US Department of State, Hezbollah uses various methods to obtain information regarding its perceived adversaries, including informer networks and telephone monitoring.[8]
STATE PROTECTION
5.1 The ability of authorities to provide state protection depends to a large degree on geographic area: several areas of Lebanon are not under the complete control of the state. Government forces are less able to enforce the law in areas where Hezbollah operates (southern suburbs of Beirut, parts of the Bekaa valley and southern Lebanon).[9]
TREATMENT OF RETURNEES
Exit and Entry Procedures
5.21 Lebanese border authorities maintain a database of ‘border alerts’ or ‘stop orders’, against which they check all travellers’ names on arrival and departure.
5.22 Beirut-Rafik Hariri International Airport is the only operational commercial airport in Lebanon. Along with the Port of Beirut, it is the main entry point into the country. Authorities perform biometric checks (photograph and fingerprinting) at the airport. The airport is located in an area of southern Beirut in which Hezbollah has considerable influence, and the organisation exercises a high degree of influence (but not total) over the airport.[10]
[8] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Pages 20 - 21
[9] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 29
[10] DFAT Country Information Report Lebanon – JUNE 2023 Page 33
The Tribunal then discussed with the applicant and considered the following more recent country information in relation to the security situation arising from the current ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
Mapping 11 months of Israel-Lebanon cross-border attacks; Al Jazeera; 11/09/24
Israel says it attacked some 30 Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon overnight on Wednesday, a regular announcement as the two sides have been exchanging attacks for the past 11 months.
On October 8, Hezbollah began launching attacks on Israel in solidarity with the Palestinian people trapped in Gaza as Israel waged war on the enclave.
Israel has attacked Hezbollah nearly four times that of the Lebanese group, tallying more than 7,800 attacks along the 120km (75-mile) border.
Some Israeli leaders have pledged to remove Hezbollah from southern Lebanon, even by force.
According to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), Israel exchanged at least 9,613 attacks with Hezbollah and other armed groups in Lebanon from October 7 to September 6.
About 82 percent of these attacks – 7,845 – were carried out by Israeli forces, which killed at least 646 people in Lebanon.[11]
[11] MAPPING 11 MONTHS OF ISRAEL-LEBANON CROSS-BORDER ATTACKS; AL JAZEERA 11 SEP 2024
At least nine people killed, thousands injured after Hezbollah pagers explode across Lebanon; ABC News; 18/09/24
At least nine people have been killed and about 2,800 others injured after pagers used by the militant group Hezbollah exploded in a wave of blasts across Lebanon.
A Hezbollah official, speaking on condition of anonymity to Reuters, said the detonation of the pagers was the "biggest security breach" the group had been subjected to in nearly a year of conflict and tensions with Israel.
Experts said the pager explosions pointed to a long-planned operation, possibly carried out by infiltrating the supply chain and rigging the devices with explosives before they were delivered to Lebanon.
The Iranian-backed militant group blamed Israel for the widespread attack and said it would get "its fair punishment".[12]
In Lebanon, some towns fear Hezbollah members are among the Shia refugees pouring in; ABC News; 17/10/24
Now, Israel’s bombing campaign against Hezbollah has seen about 1.2 million Lebanese flee their homes, according to the country’s government, with many heading to the north.
As refugees move into new towns, locals like Mr Tawachi worry about their allegiances.
His friend Omar fears Hezbollah wants to increase its presence and influence in Tripoli.[13]
[12] AT LEAST NINE PEOPLE KILLED, THOUSANDS INJURED AFTER HEZBOLLAH PAGERS EXPLODE ACROSS LEBANON; ABC NEWS; 18 SEPTEMBER 2024
[13] In Lebanon, some towns fear Hezbollah members are among the Shia refugees pouring in; ABC News; 17/10/24
The applicant agreed with all of the country information shared by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal questioned the applicant on his brother’s membership of Hezbollah, noting the country evidence that Hezbollah’s primary support base is overwhelmingly in the Shi’a Muslim community and the applicant’s evidence that his siblings are Sunni Muslim.
The applicant agreed that Hezbollah were predominantly Shi’a Muslims but gave evidence that [Mr D] gathered a group of people from around his home area and took them south to join the Hezbollah party. [Mr D] was a Sunni Muslim and an important member of Hezbollah. The applicant stated that Hezbollah is comprised of both Sunni people of and of Shi’a people but it is mainly Shi’a people.
The Tribunal questioned the applicant on his statement in his protection visa: ‘i have developed a fear from belonging to any political party especially ones affiliated with religion, this particular stance did not sit well with my brother and cousins ( [Mr B] ands [Mr C]) who are devoted to Hizbulla and followers of [Mr D] in an area dominated by Sunni Muslims.’
The applicant explained that his maternal cousins were [Mr B] and [Mr C] and that [Mr B] was the council mayor of [Town 1]. The applicant explained that his cousins took people to [Mr D].
The Tribunal questioned the applicant on whether his brother [Mr F] has pressured his other siblings to join Hezbollah. The applicant stated that his brother has not pressured his sisters to join Hezbollah because they are women and women are not recruited to Hezbollah. The applicant stated that he does not have much contact with his other two brothers but suspects that they have not been targeted to join Hezbollah because they are affected by poor health (one brother is paralysed) and by age.
The applicant stated that ever since he served in the army he has hated weapons, he has always felt uncomfortable with them. The applicant confirmed he is against weapons in general.
The Tribunal questioned the applicant on his evidence that he identified as a Sunni Muslim with appreciation of Christian values and his wife’s evidence that he leans towards Christianity. The applicant agreed that his wife would consider that he tended more towards Christianity over Islam.
The applicant stated that his brother has pressured him for a long time to join Hezbollah, however at present there is a great need for Hezbollah to recruit people due to the current conflict with Israel. The applicant stated that there is no sign of the conflict lessening and that since the explosion of the devices in September 2024 which killed or injured thousands of Hezbollah members, Hezbollah desperately needs people to fight for them. The applicant stated that if people reject a request to join Hezbollah they are considered Israeli sympathisers and are at risk of harm.
CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
Criteria for protection visa

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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
Mandatory considerations
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.
REASONS AND FINDINGS
The issue in this case is whether the applicant is 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.
For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be set aside and remitted for reconsideration.
I found the evidence of the applicant to be credible. The applicant gave detailed and convincing oral evidence about his experiences in Lebanon. The applicant’s evidence at the hearing was consistent with his written statements in his protection visa application. I found the evidence of the applicant’s wife to be credible. The applicant’s wife gave convincing evidence about her experiences in Lebanon. The evidence of the applicant and his wife was supported by documentary evidence and consistent with country information.
I accept that the applicant is a national of Lebanon. I accept that the applicant has primarily resided in or around [Town 1], however his wife and children have more recently lived in [Town 2].
I accept that the applicant was raised in a Sunni Muslim family but grew with both Muslim and Christian friends. I accept that the applicant has a [symbol] and [design] tattoo on his [body part] which reflects his understanding and appreciation of Christian values, being love and peace. I observed the tattoo at the hearing and it was evident that the tattoo was dated as it had faded a bit over time.
I accept that the applicant’s brother [Mr F] is a member of Hezbollah. I accept that whilst the applicant lived in Lebanon, his brother [Mr F] pressured the applicant to join Hezbollah. I accept that the applicant avoided having to join Hezbollah whilst he lived in Lebanon because he spent significant time working in other countries. I accept that the applicant does not support Hezbollah as he is against weapons and conflict. I accept that the applicant fled to Australia to avoid being pressured by his brother to join Hezbollah.
I accept that since the applicant has been in Australia his brother [Mr F] has become aware that the applicant does not support Hezbollah. I accept that the applicant’s brother [Mr F] has threatened the applicant that if he does not return to Lebanon to fight for Hezbollah, he will force the applicant’s children to join Hezbollah. I accept that the applicant’s brother [Mr F] sent photographs of the applicant’s son holding firearms to the applicant in connection with this threat. I accept that the applicant’s brother [Mr F] held a gun to the head of the applicant’s wife to force her to give him the applicant’s phone number in order to send the photographs and threatening message.
Based on the country information available to the Tribunal I accept that Hezbollah is a prominent Lebanese organisation comprising political elements. I accept that Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organisation in Australia. I accept that Hezbollah runs its own economic, financial, and social services institutions. I accept that Hezbollah has control over the airport and internal security structures, including detention centres. I accept that Hezbollah is a powerful player in Lebanon’s economy, politics, and media.
I accept that the applicant has been previously questioned at the Beirut-Rafik Hariri International Airport after he returned to Lebanon from working abroad. I accept that the applicant’s name would be listed as an alert at the airport due to the applicant’s views against Hezbollah and his brother’s membership of Hezbollah.
I accept that for the last 12 months there has been significant conflict between Hezbollah and Israel with numerous fatalities and injuries on both sides of the conflict. I accept that neither Hezbollah nor Israel show any signs of reducing the level of conflict.
Does the applicant satisfy the refugee criterion for protection?
If the applicant returned to Lebanon in the reasonably foreseeable future, I am satisfied he would try to return to [Town 2] as I accept that is where the applicant’s wife and children are living. I consider however that the applicant would be stopped at the airport before reaching [Town 2].
I am satisfied that the applicant’s name would be on an airport alert and the applicant would be regarded as someone who has fled Lebanon because of their views against Hezbollah. I make this finding on the basis that I accept that Hezbollah control the airport and create alerts on travellers. I accept that the applicant has previously been stopped at the airport when he has returned from international travel and released. On those occasions the applicant was lying to his brother stating that he would join Hezbollah when he finished working abroad. At that time Hezbollah was not engaged in significant entrenched conflict with Israel.
I am satisfied that the applicant’s brother [Mr F], or an agent on his behalf, would harm the applicant if the applicant returned to Lebanon in the reasonably foreseeable future. I am satisfied the chance of this occurring would be substantial. The applicant’s brother has pressured the applicant to join Hezbollah for almost two decades. The applicant’s views against Hezbollah are now known to his brother. The applicant’s brother attempted to have the applicant join Hezbollah by sending the applicant photographs of his son holding firearms and threatening that his son would take his place in joining Hezbollah if the applicant did not join Hezbollah. I am satisfied the applicant’s brother [Mr F] is capable of violence. He has demonstrated this by threatening the applicant’s wife by holding a gun to her head and by allowing children to be in possession of firearms. He is also a member of Hezbollah, a terrorist organisation. Hezbollah is currently in significant entrenched conflict with Israel. I am satisfied the applicant would face a risk to his life or liberty.
I am satisfied that the applicant would be harmed by either his brother [Mr F] or by a member of Hezbollah due to his refusal to join the organisation and his views against Hezbollah. Given Hezbollah has political elements, I am satisfied that the applicant would be harmed for his political opinions against Hezbollah and that this would be the essential and significant reason for the harm.
I am satisfied that the harm would be systematic and discriminatory in that it would be deliberate and pre-meditated and the applicant would be targeted due to his views against Hezbollah.
I am satisfied that the harm would relate to all areas of the country as I accept the country information that Hezbollah uses various methods to obtain information regarding its perceived adversaries, including informer networks and telephone monitoring.
I am satisfied that there are not effective protection measures available to the applicant as I accept the country information that government forces are not able to adequately enforce the law in areas where Hezbollah operates.
I am satisfied that the applicant could not take reasonable steps to modify his behaviour as it would require the applicant to alter his political beliefs. The applicant has had a longstanding belief in peace and love. His commitment to these values is reflected in his tattoo of a [symbol] and [design] on his [body part]. His commitment has not wavered. He has never removed the tattoo. Despite pressure, he has never accepted his brother’s invitation to join Hezbollah.
There is no evidence before the Tribunal to indicate that the applicant has a right to enter and reside in any other country such that Australia would be taken not to have protection obligations.
I am satisfied that the applicant is outside of the country of his nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable to avail himself of the protection of that country. I am satisfied the applicant is a refugee.
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s 36(2)(a).
DECISION
The Tribunal sets aside and remits the application for a protection visa for reconsideration, in accordance with the order that the applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.
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.
…