2103311 (Refugee) - [2024] ARTA 760

2103311 (REFUGEE) [2024] ARTA 760 (3 DECEMBER 2024)
DECISION AND
REASONS FOR DECISION
Respondent: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

Tribunal Number: 2103311
Tribunal:General Member R Johnston
Date:3 December 2024

Place:Sydney
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 03 December 2024 at 8:58am
CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – Protection Visa – Tanzania – race – Nyakyusa – fears being subjected to female genital mutilation – physical and verbal abuse from father – verbal abuse and harassment from family members and community – particular social group – a single woman without children – a woman who is uncircumcised – a single woman diagnosed with mental health symptoms – prevalence of gender-based violence – state protection not available – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024
Migration Act 1958, ss 5, 36, 65, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, 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 15 March 2021 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 Tanzania, applied for the visa on 23 August 2016. 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.
On 16 March 2021 the applicant lodged an application for review of the Department’s refusal decision with the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). On 14 October 2024, the AAT became the Administrative Review Tribunal (Tribunal). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), applications for review to the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are taken to be an application for review to the Tribunal. The Transitional Act gives the Tribunal the authority to continue and finalise any aspect of the review not already completed by the AAT.
This decision and statement of reasons is made by the Tribunal.
CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE
Claims and evidence before the Department
Protection visa application
The applicant lodged a protection visa application on 23 August 2016. In that application she provided the following:
·     She was born in [Mbeya], Tanzania.
·     Her ethnicity is Nyakyusa. She is a Christian.
·     Her cousin and step-brother are in Australia. She also has step-siblings in Tanzania.
·     Whilst in Tanzania she resided in Dar Es Salaam between 1999 and 2009.
·     In Australia she has completed [qualifications]. She has worked in [a range of fields].
In a statement attached to her protection visa application the applicant made the following claims:
·     She grew up between Dar Es Salaam and Arusha and she also lived in Mbeya which is the village of her father. Her mother is from the Somali origin, but her family lived and settled in Mbeya and Dar-es-Salaam. Her father is from Mbeya, an area where FGM is practiced. Both of her parents come from communities where the practice of FGM is very common.
·     She was mostly raised up by her mother, which assisted her in keeping away from the people of Mbeya where FGM is most practiced. This does not mean she was completely safe because among the Somali people this is practiced commonly too. Her mum kept her away from the Somali communities and the angry village mate of Mbeya people who are not after the girl-child education and are only interested in luring her into marriage without attaining any level of education.
·     With the practice of early marriage and FGM being common, she knew if she travelled far away it will give her peace of mind and a chance to study without disturbance from her village mates. So that when she goes back to Tanzania, she will be a person of substance and she will be able to tell people about her ordeal and also change the negative thinking of the community about the concept of treating women as second-hand citizens. Her dream was to become a teacher so that she can help fellow citizens to reject bad traditions. Both of her parents being from the community where the practice of FGM is very common, were under pressure from the community to surrender their daughters for circumcision so as to earn respect and status in the community so this puts them in so much grave danger.
·     After completing her secondary studies in 2006 she was inspired by her elder bother to travel to Australia as a student. She thought this was a great opportunity as it would keep her away from the communities and she would not be subject to FGM. In 2009 she had the opportunity to travel to Australia on the International Student Visa program to study a [qualification].
·     She was confident and kept going back to Tanzania during her holidays. She did not know she was being spied on by members of her community. Every time during the period she went for holidays in Tanzania she was welcomed and given a good welcome party. Never did she know that this was a trick to get her and lure her to accept the FGM. On [date] March 2016 she arrived in Tanzania on a special request by her family members stating that there was an emergency. Three days later on [date] March 2016 while in the neighbourhood she saw people and some of her family members coming to her home. When she returned home that evening she was surprised when she saw the traditional healers and some of her aunties and she knew this was a plot to have her circumcised.
·     She had been going back to Tanzania for holidays, but her last visit was comprised of a very great threat to her life. She fears returning to Tanzania because she knows that when she goes back, they will forcefully circumcise her. When she is circumcised, it will destroy her completely as a woman. The effect will be on her for a very long time. She also fears she will be forced to go through a very painful experience and that she will be forced to go through a very life threatening traditional ritual which is going to cost her life.
·     Some of her friends who have been circumcised have contracted the HIV-AIDs virus and are now going through a very painful experience until they die. She fears that once she is subjected to this exercise, she will contact the AIDS virus which will lead to her death.
·     On the evening of [date March] 2016 she was held by four strong women who twisted her arms behind her back and forced her into one of the huts where she lives, and they told her that she has been evading their tradition since childhood. They said that the time had come for her to face the knife. She pleaded for help, but no one was listening to her. She was held in the neck and she suffocated and fainted. This was the most painful experience she had faced in her life. She collapsed and feinted and this was the only chance that assisted her to escape from being circumcised. She was taken that night to the nearest dispensary at Mbeya, and she gained consciousness in the morning and although she was in pain that morning, she knew it was the chance for her to escape. She sneaked out of the dispensary and reported to the police station at [Mbeya] on [date March] 2016.
·     On the morning of [date March] 2016 she reported to the police station at [Mbeya] and the police took her statement but when they heard that she was just escaping from a cultural practice they relaxed the investigations and said they would write a letter indicating that she went to the police. She was disappointed that the police and whole law enforcement agency of the government failed to protect her from such a very painful experience being inflicted on her by members of her community.
·     She thought about [Women’s Organisation 1] in Mbeya and on [date March] 2016 she also went to their office. They were not shocked at her situation, and they told her that many young girls go through such ordeals in the community of the people living in Mbeya and also, they said that they do not have the powers to stop such things from happening and they strongly rely on government support, but unfortunately, they lack the resources to give her protection. They advised that it would be safe for her to keep away from the community because they will get her anywhere she travelled within the community. They only provided her with a reference letter. She was again really disappointed since she could not get satisfactory protection.
·     That evening she was very scared and could not go back home. She only had to spend the night at her friend’s house which is about 8km away from her home. She told her that she is not safe at her house, and she should not keep at her house for many days.
·     On 25 March 2016 she decided to go to [Organisation 2]. She thought this organisation being a human rights institution will be more vigilant in protecting her. She was equally shocked that they only provided her with a reference letter, and they told her it’s a great challenge to fight against the culture. They advised her that she should leave the country if she needed to be safe.
·     As a growing girl child her mother tried to move her family from town to town to ensure her safety from the village that could inflict this practice on her. In primary school they moved from Mbeya to Arusha where they spent a few years and then moved to Dar-es-Salaam and later moved back to Arusha but there hasn’t been a safe place for her.
·     During her recent visit to Tanzania, and as advised where she sought help from [Women’s Organisation 1] and [Organisation 2], there is no way out for a safer place in Tanzania. She would be found from anywhere in Tanzania and will be subjected to this practice.
·     When she returns to Tanzania, she is definitely sure that she will be mistreated, and she will be harmed and the kind of mistreatment or harm that will be inflicted on her will destroy her forever and will lead to her death.
·     When she was falsely arrested and her arms twisted behind her back, when force was applied in an attempt to restrain her to get her circumcised, when she was held by her neck and even suffocated up to the point of becoming unconscious just because they wanted to subject her to traditional practices, that was a very big mistreatment and harm she experienced.
·     If she returns to Tanzania, the people of Mbeya and also the people of the Somali where her mother comes from would like to have her circumcised. They would like the women to feel the force and the pain of the knife in order to prepare for the childbirth and experience which is extremely painful. She is not ready to tolerate that kind of pain.
·     The Somali and people of Mbeya could subject a woman to circumcision which is a traditional rite. They said it is how pure their ideal woman should be, with the pain deliberately inflicted in preparation for women for childbirth. Since she belongs to these two communities, she would be subjected to this practice in either community when she returns to Tanzania and this is like to damage her womanhood forever and even cause her death, so she is not ready to return to Tanzania.
·     When she goes back to Tanzania there is no protection available for her. Since she was growing up as a small girl her mother raised her in the most difficult way. She survived so narrowly until when it was extremely difficult to hide. The authorities failed to protect her while she was young. She had to leave the country on her own initiatives to further her studies in Australia.
·     On [date March] 2016 when the angry villagers from the Mbeya community came to her home and picked her from the neighbourhood and nearly strangled her to death, she did not receive protection of any kind. When she reported the matter to the police, she did not get protection whatsoever. When she went to the [Women’s Organisation 1] and the [Organisation 2], they all told her clearly that they cannot protect her. They told her that she is not safe in Tanzania as matters to do with cultures are very difficult to address. Issues to do with cultures are big challenges because they are cultural orientations of many people, and they associate so much with their cultures which is their identity. There is also a lack of resources to protect victims of such cultures they said.
·     While she was young her mother was able to relocate from Mbeya to Arusha and Dar-es-Salaam which are different towns that are distanced from each other. This did not help at all. It was only temporary and the people from this practice are passionate about their culture and are ready to have it not compromised through the nations. There is no way she can be safe in any part of Tanzania. This is also because the communities are not only in the regions of Mbeya, but they are spread-out everywhere. And these traditions are not only practiced in the villages only, but also in any part of Tanzania to a person who is identified to be coming from that community.
The applicant provided the following supporting documents with her protection visa application:
·     A letter from [Women’s Organisation 1] dated [date March] 2016 stating the applicant contacted their office on [date March] 2016 because of abuses inflicted on her on [date March] 2016 related to female genital mutilation.
·     A letter from [a government agency] dated [date March] 2016 stating on [date March] 2016 the applicant was at her home where many people were gathered, and she discovered it was a celebration by her community to have her mutilated as the Nyakyusa culture dictates. The letter indicates the applicant was arrested, detained, assaulted and mocked until she could escape and report the matter to the district police station. It is reported she was hiding in the house of a friend until she could return to Australia and that the police were investigating the matter.
·     Letter dated [in] March 2016 from [Organisation 2] stating they had been approached by the applicant who had been arrested and falsely imprisoned by members of her community for the purposes of inflicting Female Genital Mutilation on [date March] 2016 and threatened and mocked by aggressive members of the community accusing her of evading the provisions of their customs and traditions.
·     Sarah Mwambalaswa, ‘Female Genital Mutilation Practice in Tanzania’, undated.
·     Female Genital Mutilation in Tanzania, BMZ, Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, September 2011.
Interview with the delegate
The applicant attended an interview with a delegate of the Department on 12 March 2021. The interview was conducted in English. In the interview, the applicant responded to questions and elaborated on her claims. The Tribunal has listened to a recording of the interview. Where relevant, the applicant’s oral evidence at the interview is referred to in the Tribunal’s analysis below.
The delegate’s decision
On 15 March 2021, a delegate of the Minister refused the applicant’s protection visa application. The delegate accepted Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is part of the applicant’s family cultural practices. They were not satisfied attempts had been made to inflict FGM on the applicant or that she fears being subjected to FGM in Tanzania. They found the applicant had fabricated her claims about being forced by her extended family members to undergo FGM and that the threats she allegedly continues to receive were made in order to enhance her chances of being granted protection in Australia. They did not accept there is any evidence to demonstrate that the applicant has a real chance of being persecuted for any reason on return to Tanzania. The delegate was not satisfied that the applicant is a refugee, as defined by s 5H(1) of the Act or that there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed to Tanzania, there is a real risk that she will suffer significant harm as defined in s 36(2)(aa) of the Act. The delegate therefore found the applicant is not a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations.
Claims and evidence before the Tribunal
Review application
On 16 March 2021, the applicant lodged an application for review of the delegate’s decision.
Pre-hearing submissions and evidence
On 13 November 2024 the applicant provided the Tribunal with a copy of a psychological report of Dr [A], dated 2 September 2024, although noted by the applicant’s representative at hearing to not have been received by the applicant until 28 October 2024. The psychological report details instances of abuse the applicant experienced in Tanzania, including from her father as a child, and in relation to an attempted arranged marriage. The report provides the following in respect of the applicant’s psychological assessment and results:
·     A Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21), Beck Depression Index (B.D.I.), Beck Anxiety Index (B.A.I.) and The Detailed Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress (DAPS) were conducted across appointments over 23 August 2024 to 28 August 2024.
·     Based on the applicant’s DAPS responses, she is likely to satisfy diagnostic criteria for Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
·     Associated mental health impacts for the applicants Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder include anxiety and depression, emotional regulation issues, and relationship difficulties.
On 14 November 2024 the applicant provided the Tribunal with a supplementary statement dated that same date. In that document the applicant makes the following claims:
·     She fears if forced to return to Tanzania she will be serious harmed due to female circumcision from her family members, namely her father and/or her aunties on her father’s side, physical and verbal abuse from her father, verbal abuse and harassment from her family members and the community, being pressured to marry someone she doesn’t agree to, and damage to her mental health.
·     She also fears being seriously harmed because of her status as a single woman in Tanzania, her status as a woman who has not undergone circumcision in Tanzania, and her status as a woman who has continuously struggled with mental health.
·     The authorities are unable to protect her because of her past experience reporting to the police. Women have no power in Tanzania and circumcision, even though there are laws, is still accepted and practiced. People know not to say anything and the police will not do anything about it.
·     In Tanzania she spent her life in Mbeya, Arusha and Dar Es Salaam. She has multiple step siblings in Tanzania.
·     She came to study in Australia in 2009 when she was [age] years of age. Following the incident that happened when she travelled back to Tanzania, she lodged her protection visa application with the help of a friend. She was not legally trained.
·     She lives with her cousin-sister and her three children. Her half-brother still lives in Australia. She works as a [Occupation 1] five to six days a week.
·     In Tanzanian culture you do not cut off your family. Her mother was a refugee and had no paperwork. She was unable to travel to another country and felt stuck. She did not risk being cut off from her husband because he provided with her financial support and a place to stay. Without that support her mother would have nothing which is why she had to keep speaking with the family. It is also expected. Cutting them out of her life was not an option for her mother. This is how it is in Tanzania, and you just can’t cut people off. Her mother got financial support from her husband and his family and could not get her own passport which meant she couldn’t move to another country.
·     If she were cut off from her family in Tanzania it would have been worse. She had no choice but to live with her family in Tanzania. She was struggling in school and stopped attending. Her father told her to work at his business. She did not get paid. She helped him with whatever had to get done. Her mother at the time was living in her father’s house in the village. At [age] she does not know what else she could have done. She had thoughts of running away and becoming a hooker.
·     She travelled back to Tanzania four times as a student. The exact dates are[date] December 2013 to [date] January 2014, [date] March 2015 to [date] April 2015, [date] December 2015 to [date] January 2016, and [date] March 2016 to [date] March 2016. The first trip was to visit her family. She doesn’t remember the trip. She remembers not caring what happened to her. She was depressed and struggling mentally. The second trip was for her grandmother on her father’s side’s funeral. Her cousin-sister and brother paid for her to go. She felt like she had to go, otherwise she was doing something evil. Her father told her off because she went to Australia to study, and she chose to stay and finish her course. Her father kept saying why are you staying there, and she didn’t tell him it was because of him, and she just told him that she wanted to finish what she started. He refused to support her financially from that point onwards for further study.
·     On the third trip she attended her cousin-sister’s wedding. She felt like home was not home. Her father was not pleasant. It wasn’t a good experience for her. She doesn’t really remember speaking to anyone, there were a lot of family members there. The last time she travelled was because her uncle on her father’s side had passed away. She felt like she had no choice as this uncle had helped raise her and she feared what her family would do if she said she would not go. It was also her cousin-sister’s father. Her brain was stitched off. Most of the time she buried her feelings and dealt with them. It was during this visit that she was ambushed.
·     She currently speaks with her mother three to four times a week. Her mother lives in Mbeya, in a property that her father owns. Her father doesn’t live with her mother in his property. He lives in Dar Es Salaam.
·     Her mother has told her she is worried for her if she comes back to Tanzania and that it won’t be safe to be there. She did not ask anything further, and assumes she is talking about her being a single woman, the politics there, the quality of life for single women and pressure from the family. Her mother mentioned the aunties were eyeing her constantly because she is against everything they believe in, like circumcision.
·     Her mother particularly mentioned her father, although didn’t state exactly why she fears for her safety. She knows her father is angry at her for staying on in Australia. She knows her mother believes she would be at risk of being beaten by her father. It is something that was done before and they used to just cop it, so it is not surprising to her. Her mother mentioned that she wants to take her father to court because of their own issues. She knows her father is getting married to a new wife and her mother is fighting for her fair share with the hope that she can disconnect herself from the family. Her father doesn’t want this, and her mother is worried her father will take out his anger on her or her brother.
·     When she first came to Australia, she stayed in contact with her father because she needed his financial support. When he couldn’t help, her cousin-sister and brother would help out. She felt she had to keep in contact with her father.
·     In her first semester at university she was admitted to hospital after a meltdown. She tried to act fine to be released. Once release she spoke to her father, and he would just tease her. He made fun of her because she got admitted. He found out through her cousin-sister. Since then she spoke to him on and off. She needed his financial support. A reverend at the church she was attending gave her counselling and encouraged her to have a relationship with her father.
·     Her calls with her father are one minute long. Her brother has contact with him and is harassed by him. Her father does not know she has sought protection in Australia.
·     She finds her experiences in Tanzania very hard to talk about. She spoke to the psychologist about some things. The report from the psychologist has been sent to the Tribunal.
·     There is a big stigma around single women. They are often verbally abused from the community, stared at as if something is wrong with them and harassed. Single women find it difficult to find work and even if they do find work, would very likely be sexually targeted at that workplace. It would be very difficult for her to safely live in Tanzania as a single woman and be left alone. She has some savings but how long will they last? She won’t be able to find a house or a job. She would be reliant on her father. It is very common for women who are looking for a job or in fear of losing their job to be asked to do sexual favours. She has seen it herself when she used to work in her father’s company. The ladies there would often talk about it and share it amongst themselves. On one occasion, she overheard that her father had sex with one of the workers. She finds this hard to say or talk about, because it’s her father, and it makes her very uncomfortable.
·     Having known her father and experienced what she has, she believes that she would be at risk of physical and verbal violence from her father. She believes her mother when she tells her it’s not safe particularly because of him. She has spoken about her experiences of physical violence from her father with the psychologist.
·     When she returned to Tanzania, her father would say bad words to her. He would say “who would marry you now, no one will love you”. Her father would pressure her and say “whoever comes for marriage now, you should just accept them and have a child because you’re not good enough for anyone.” She fears that she will be under continuous pressure to marry from her father and her father’s family members. She fears they will present a man for her to marry, and she will face family pressure to marry him. This is because her family have done this in the past to her cousins and her brother.
·     One of her sisters was presented with a guy that they grew up with. She guesses in a way she chose that relationship too, so she could get away from their father. However, she knows that sister of hers is now experiencing violence from that husband and she cannot leave. Another sister ran away from the home to escape her father and the family, and she told her she couldn’t take the abuse anymore. She moved states in Tanzania and had met someone there. Her father did not agree to take the dowry for this marriage and has cut her off from the family. She doesn’t know if she is experiencing any violence in that relationship at the moment.
·     She would fear harm from her family and father in Tanzania. She would not be able to be herself. It’s either their way or the highway. If it’s the highway, then the whole family will cut her off. The pressure to stay connected with the family is so strong that she fears she will not be able to say no to a marriage they present to her. She would not have an option to be cut off from her family, because as a single woman without that financial support from her father, she would not survive.
·     While she knows that as an adult woman the risk of circumcision is less than that of babies and young girls, if she were pressured to marry, she knows that the man would have every power to have her circumcised in order to be his wife. There is great stigma around marrying and uncircumcised woman and in Tanzania, she would have no power against that man if this is what he wanted. This is the normal culture back home. She is always in fear of being ambushed like she was in 2016. It can happen out of nowhere, with no conversation about it before.
·     If she had to return now, there would be no option of escape. She would be tied to her father and his family and not be able to survive anywhere else. Maybe if her mum stayed in her own place and was independent herself, she would have been safe. But this is not the case, and she doesn’t think it ever will be the case. She has no choice but to rely on her father and stay in his house.
·     She cannot speak on the difficulties she would face with finding somewhere else to stay in Tanzania, because she has never tried this on her own. But she has heard of her mum’s struggles. She cannot afford to cut herself off from her husband and afford a place to live on her own. She has heard of her sister’s struggles, who had to get married in order to escape and is now trapped in a domestic violence relationship.
·     She also knows if her father wanted to find her in Tanzania, he would be able to. Her father has power in the village as he was a member of [parliament]. People know him and recognize him. People also recognize him because he does his business well in Dar Es Salaam.
·     Seeing the psychologist was a helpful experience for her. Working long hours has been a coping mechanism for her. She wants to continue with treatment, because she knows she can’t keep living like this. When she was living in Tanzania, mental health was not something that was discussed. She doesn’t know if it is discussed more now but they don’t speak about it in her family.
·     From what she does know while living in Tanzania, she does not think any form of treatment or psychological help would be available to her. She fears her mental health will just continue to get worse, her brain will switch off like it used to before and she will stop just caring about being harmed.

In her statement the applicant also provided comments in response to the Departmental delegate’s decision record, including the risk and constant pressure she and her sisters were under whilst in Tanzania to be circumcised, and how this is not something that is openly discussed.
The applicant attached to her statement of 14 November 2024 a copy of her [qualifications].
On 18 November 2024 the applicant’s representative provided the Tribunal with written submissions in support of the applicant’s appeal. In those submissions the applicant’s representative advanced the following:
·     The applicant fears being persecuted in Tanzania for the following essential and significant reasons: her membership of a particular group as a woman; her membership of a particular social group as a single woman who has not undergone female circumcision, also known as Female Genital Mutilation; her membership of a particular social group as a single woman diagnosed with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. There is a real chance the applicant will be persecuted for one or more of these reasons and such persecution would involve serious harm to the applicant, including threats to her life or liberty, significant physical abuse and harassment, significant physical ill-treatment, significant economic hardship that threatens her capacity to subsist, and significant damage to her mental health.
·     The applicant’s option on return to Tanzania would be limited. Her first option would be to avoid being cut off and maintain a relationship with her father and her father’s family. She will be heavily reliant on her family for financial support in order to subsist within the community. As a consequence she would be under significant pressure to comply with demands made by the family, such as enter a marriage without her consent and as a result of the man’s request, undergo FGM. If she disagrees with her family and is cut off, the risks of significant ill-treatment, discrimination and harassment that she would be subjected to when attempting to subsist within the community as a single woman who has not undergone FGM has been raised by the applicant. The applicant has also raised damage to her mental health.
·     If the applicant remains unmarried, she fears social ostracism, significant ill-treatment, and physical harassment, as supported by country information, including the United States’ country report.
·     Individuals who suffer from mental illness may face official or societal discrimination, including stigma, social ostracism, harassment and violence. If returned to Tanzania, country information strongly supports the applicant would be subjected to serous mental and psychological harm. References are made to the World Bank’s 2021 report and to limited counselling and mental health providers for gender based violence survivors and few formal psychosocial services. Tanzania has 1.31 mental health workers per 100,000 people and a single mental health hospital in Mirembe.
·     Country information on the lack of adequate and available state protection in Tanzania for women supports the applicant’s claims. The normalisation of gender based violence is evidenced in Tanzania’s response to violence against women and the available resources for women to seek protection. It is submitted whilst the country has attempted to create legal infrastructure to respond to FGM and gender based violence and protect those at risk, country information highlights that the implementation and enforcement of any legislative protections are a challenge, with weak investigations, social norms against reporting violence, delays within the court system, corruption among the police and judiciary all greatly hindering the ability for victims/survivors to find protection.
The applicant’s representative also made submissions in respect of FGM statistics in Tanzania and in respect of the Departmental delegate’s decision record relating to the applicant’s claims in respect of FGM.
The hearing
The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 20 November 2024 to give evidence and present arguments. No witnesses were called to give evidence in support of the applicant’s claims. The applicant was represented in relation to the review. The representative attended the Tribunal hearing.
The hearing was conducted in English. The Tribunal confirmed with the applicant to let the Tribunal, or her representative know at any time if she wanted to use the services of an interpreter. The applicant was able to answer questions without hesitation and her answers demonstrated an understanding of the questions being put to her.
The Tribunal acknowledged the report of Dr [A] at the commencement of the hearing. In their report [Dr A] stated, as to the applicant’s fitness for a hearing with the Tribunal, that the applicant would understand little of the formal proceedings and struggle to act as a reliable witness on her own behalf, particularly if vigorously or aggressively cross-examined. [Dr A] cautioned against re-triggering the applicant with traumatic memories that may exacerbate the trauma she had experienced as a result of family and domestic violence and that may produce an unsatisfactory or inconsistent testimony. The Tribunal indicated to the applicant at hearing the Tribunal would be guided by her as to the pace she required to give evidence and reflect on the Tribunal’s questions. The Tribunal also acknowledged the sensitivity of the issues involved and the traumatic nature of the claims being discussed. The Tribunal indicated to the applicant to let it or her representative know if at any time she needed a break. During the hearing the Tribunal checked with the applicant if she required breaks, particularly when discussing traumatic events.
The Tribunal asked the applicant at the commencement of the hearing if she felt well and able to tell her story. She said she felt fifty fifty. The Tribunal indicated to the applicant if she felt she needed to stop and take a break or discuss any matter with her representative, to let the Tribunal or her representative know. After discussing a few matters with the applicant, the Tribunal was satisfied the applicant was able to understand its questions and respond to them. Whilst at times the applicant exhibited signs of distress and difficulty discussing certain topics, she was able to expand in her answers when prompted, provide detail in support of her claims, and participate effectively in the hearing.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant had a reasonable and genuine opportunity to present evidence and submissions, be heard, and participate fully in the hearing. Where relevant, the applicant’s oral evidence to the Tribunal is referred to in the analysis below.
Post-hearing submissions and evidence
On 29 November 2024, the applicant provided the Tribunal with the following further evidence in support of her appeal:
·     Details of her father’s membership in parliament, including a screenshot illustrating his Membership of [a named] Committee between [years] and of [Parliament] between [years].
·     Details of her father’s [business] in Dar Es Salaam.
·     Details of her father’s company in his own name.
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. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be set aside and remitted for reconsideration.
Nationality
The applicant claims to be a citizen of Tanzania and provided a copy of the bio-data page of her Tanzanian passport to the Department. The delegate was satisfied that the applicant is using her own identity and that she is a citizen of Tanzania. At hearing the applicant presented her Tanzanian passport to the Tribunal. The applicant has consistently claimed to be a citizen of Tanzania. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal accepts this and finds the applicant is a citizen of Tanzania and Tanzania is her receiving country for the purposes of assessing her claims for protection.
Analysis, reasons and findings
In the hearing the Tribunal discussed the applicant’s protection claims, why she fears returning to Tanzania, her family background and family relationships, her travel history, and her work, education, and residential history.
The applicant has been in Australia largely since 2009 when she arrived as a student. She lodged her protection visa application in August 2016, where her claims centred on her fears related to female genital mutilation (FGM) being carried out on her in accordance with the traditional practices of her paternal and maternal family. Whilst in Australia the applicant has experienced mental health issues and has obtained a psychological assessment and treatment. In her most recent statement to the Tribunal and at hearing the applicant raised claims related to a broader background of systemic and perversive family violence and abuse perpetrated on her by her father. The Tribunal had the benefit of an extensive psychological report detailing the applicant’s mental health assessment, discussed in further detail below, and which provided details of the applicant’s disclosure of specific instances of abuse she experienced from her father. At hearing the applicant expressed fears of returning to Tanzania and being subject to continued abuse from her father, in addition to fears of being harmed as a single woman without children, a woman who is uncircumcised, a woman who is experiencing mental health symptoms, and a woman seeking employment and housing in a society where she would have no family support.
Whilst the applicant has advanced a number of claims for protection, in this decision record the Tribunal has dealt only with the claims relevant to its decision.
The applicant’s personal background and family violence from her father
The applicant is a single [age] year old woman who was born in Mbeya. Her parents are married, although have a complicated relationship, which the applicant found difficult to describe at hearing. The applicant detailed she only remembers seeing her parents live under the one roof at Christmas time. She explained her family is weird and there are more than seventeen members, some of whom she has never met, and some younger than her. She explained she was raised by her mother, although described throughout the hearing spending extensive periods of time in Tanzania with her father.
Of her large extended family, the applicant explained her cousin and step-brother live in Australia. She has a number of other step-siblings in Tanzania, as well as aunties and uncles on her mother and father’s side. Her father’s family are from Mbeya and her mother’s family are originally from Somalia. The applicant stated at hearing that she has some contact with her step siblings, mostly the older ones. She referred to a [social media group] with some siblings. Her connection with her family was characterised as not something she could rely on, as everyone was dealing with their own things. She explained some of her family have passed away since her arrival in Australia. An uncle remains living in Mbeya and an aunty in Dar Es Salaam. She does not have direct contact with them.
The applicant described moving back and forth to different places as a child and moving around due to having an abusive parent. She explained she attended primary school in different locations but mostly in Ashura. Consistent with her evidence at her Departmental interview, she explained attending boarding school and moving between Mbeya, Ashura and Dar Es Salaam. Her high school years were spent in Dar Es Salaam where she explained she lived with her father and travelled to stay with her mother in Mbeya at times.
The applicant detailed in around 2003-2005 her stepmother died. At the time she was living in Dar Es Salaam and was expected to look after her younger siblings and act like an adult. She described her father being largely absent for periods of time, coming home to have dinner and vacating again. She also described a consistent fear of her father throughout her childhood, connected to ongoing physical and emotional abuse (as detailed below).
In her evidence throughout the process the applicant has consistently maintained she worked after high school in her father’s shop and lived in her late teenage years in Dar Es Salaam.
In 2009 the applicant came to Australia to study. She explained her father initially provided her with financial support whilst she was in Australia, although stopped supporting her after her first degree. She indicated across her oral and written evidence that she had been supported at times by her cousin with flight tickets back to Tanzania and that she obtains income through her employment as a [Occupation 1].
The Tribunal explored with the applicant at hearing what her father’s response was to her studies in Australia. She stated that he was fifty percent in support at first. She detailed her father’s verbal abuse of her on her departure to Australia, and negative comments about her scholastic abilities. The applicant explained it was her cousin in Australia who assisted her with her student visa application. She explained for herself when she left Tanzania, she felt like she was dying, even though she was going away from the whole drama.
The applicant explained she has worked in Australia in [Occupation 1]. As to her housing, she stated she has always lived with her cousin in Sydney, other than an attempt to undertake a study placement in [another State]. The applicant explained she left that placement after a few months as she was struggling and felt she could not be far away from people that she knew. Whilst living with her cousin she has paid for her share of the bills and for her room. The accommodation and bills are in her cousin’s name.
At hearing the Tribunal discussed with the applicant the abuse she experienced in Tanzania from her father, and any attempts he had made to exert control over her or harass her in Australia. The Tribunal had the benefit of [Dr A]’s psychological report, within which [Dr A] includes details and specific examples of the family violence and harm the applicant experienced in Tanzania from her father, in addition to a diagnosis of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for the applicant.
At hearing the applicant explained at first, she could not open up to [Dr A] and needed to write down what happened to her and hand that information over in her appointments. Whilst the applicant was visibly distressed at times reflecting on her background, and at times struggled to expand on her answers, across the hearing the applicant provided a detailed, persuasive, and consistent account of the abuse she and her siblings experienced from her father in Tanzania. Her account was consistent with the details contained in [Dr A]’s report, although did not appear rehearsed.
The applicant provided the following details to the Tribunal in detailing her experience of family violence in Tanzania:
·     Her father would beat her with a horse whip at any given time. This included when she did not do well in school, did not do what he wanted, if the house was dirty, if she had not cooked well, or for any reason he wanted. She was also slapped by her father.
·     The physical abuse resulted in bleeding on her body and scars.
·     Her father was verbally abusive and angry. His anger would escalate quickly, and he would start yelling and abusing her over little things.
·     He verbally berated her, including in the community. He called her crazy, said she was a lost cause, and said such mean things to the point where she felt like she was nothing. Her family members would berate her as well, following what her father did.
·     He financially controlled her. He provided for the house and the family and if he didn’t provide her with financial support, she would have no house and no food.
·     He manipulated her and threatened her. He would state if she didn’t do certain things, he would do certain things, or cut her off and not give her any money. He made her work in his shop without payment, otherwise he would say she has to leave.
·     At twelve years of age she was arranged to be married. It was not her mother who arranged this, only her father. Her mother was financially tied to her father and would have said yes verbally but she had to pretend to do that to survive. Her mother moved her around to save her from these things. She refused the marriage and was whipped and hit by him as a result. He stopped providing for her mother for a year after the arranged marriage did not happen. She didn’t know that at the time. Her mother took her elsewhere after that incident and explained later that she didn’t have financial support for the year.
·     The abuse occurred across the whole time she was in Tanzania, including when she was a teenager and before she came to Australia.
·     She was fearful of her father in Tanzania and what harm he may inflict on her. Before coming to Australia she was planning to run away from her father.

The Tribunal explored with the applicant what her current relationship with her father is like, and what their contact has been like since she departed Tanzania in 2009 to study in Australia. As to their current contact she stated she rarely has a conversation with her father, and it is largely a guilt trip and about once a month. She stated her last conversation with her father was him telling her he was getting married again. The applicant’s characterisation of her conversations with her father were of dread and fear. She described seeing his phone number come and being terrified, and of hearing people talk in Australia and who sound like him and becoming afraid. She stated when her father is happy, you are happy, but when he is not happy, it’s like a war and there is hitting, whipping, and abuse.
In describing her contact with her father on her return visits to Tanzania across 2009 to 2016 the applicant explained she had minimal contact with her father and that she stayed away from family as much as possible. She described verbal abuse, threats, and anger, although indicated she was not physically abused by her father on her return trips as she wasn’t in Dar Es Salaam where he was based and where he had whipped her, and she was in Mbeya where she could move around to her grandmother’s house or other neighbours. In exploring the interactions she had with her father in more detail, she discussed the intensity of his anger and the verbal abuse, the insulting words he issued her, threats about getting married, him yelling at her, and of her feeling scared. She stated each interaction with her father is intense and that he is scary to be around.
She stated on her trip after finishing her course her father told her she had to stay in Tanzania and that he threatened her, stating he would otherwise cut her off. She stated her father was constantly trying to get her to return to Tanzania, although she insisted she had not finished her studies. The applicant explained her father wants her to return to Tanzania to control her life and be a part of his family and Tanzanian culture.
The Tribunal explored with the applicant what aspects of her life she believes her father wants to control. She spoke of his desire to control every aspect of her life – who she lives with, who she becomes, what becomes of her, where she works, and everything she does. She said her father says horrible things to her, believes she is wasting her life in Australia, and wants her to get married in accordance with traditional customs. She explained he raised her need to get married on multiple occasions after the incident when she was a child and that he would try to arrange a marriage in the community. Although he has not arranged a specific person for her to marry, she stated her father mentions marriage frequently and given her age, he has stated he is not sure who he can arrange now from his community for a marriage.
The applicant discussed her fear of her father’s influence in all aspects of her future life in the context of her father’s control in her sister’s and cousin’s lives. In her written statement and at hearing the applicant detailed how her father similarly abused her siblings. In discussing what her father’s relationship with her siblings is currently like, the applicant stated three of her sisters left her family and her father because of what he was doing to their lives. She indicated her cousins are also terrified they can’t make their own choices and are controlled by him. She provided examples of her sisters working for her father, living in his properties, and not having a say in anything.
She provided specific examples of her father’s abuse of her sisters and cousins, including of her father arranging marriages for them. She explained two of her cousins are currently arranged to be married to people they did not choose themselves and that were arranged by her father. She explained she is in a [social media group] with some of her cousins and siblings that her father is not in, and they have communicated in that group that they have been pressured into those marriage and they were arranged.
She elaborated on how her sister went to [Country 1], but her father arranged for her to return to Tanzania after he found out she was partying and drinking there. The applicant was uncertain how her father obtained that information, although her sister told her he was given the information, leading her to have to return to Tanzania and remain with her father. That sister was unable to continue school and had to remain in Dar Es Salaam with her father. The applicant stated that sister mentioned in around 2014 that she was going to run away as the abuse was too much for her, and so she just left. She explained at first no one knew where that sister went to, then it was discovered she went to another state in Tanzania. The applicant explained that sister is back in Dar Es Salaam now, although is cut off entirely from the family and obtains no family support. Her sister has told her she has interacted with her father in Dar Es Salaam and there was an issue, and she does not want to talk about it, and she has to deal with it. The applicant explained that sister has a partner that she is living with now.
In discussing this sister’s circumstances, the applicant explained her father investigated her sister and asked what she was doing and where she was. She explained her father was asking her about her when she returned to Tanzania. She expressed concerns about his capacity to obtain information given he had been able to find out information about her sister in [Country 1] and given his continued interest in her sister even after she had been cut off from the family.
The applicant explained although two of her sisters have left forever now, her father looks for a way to be connected in their lives in one way or another. She stated her other sister left and found a man to marry but her father refused the dowry and has disowned the sister. As a result she cannot get married in Tanzania, and does not have a peaceful marriage, or work, or a peaceful life. She explained her father is pressuring her sister to return home and get married to someone else that he approves. The applicant detailed how her father has controlled her sister’s choices in her life in terms of her work, relationships, marital status, and family connections.
Whilst she indicated her brother was antagonised on the phone by her father, each of her examples about her father controlling her siblings’ lives and making decisions in respect of their work, housing, partners and control of their adult lives concerned her female siblings and her female cousins. The applicant herself explained at hearing that the abuse she experienced was considered normal in Tanzania. She stated when she was beaten up by her father, neighbours could hear, but no one got involved. She stated her grandmother and stepmother were often present, but they did not get involved.
The Tribunal explored with the applicant whether her mother was abused by her father. She stated she had not seen her mother be physically abused by her father, although she had seen her mother crying. The applicant was reluctant to define her parent’s relationship, and struggled to explain their continued connection and interaction, other than stating she doesn’t understand their relationship. She did explain in detail the extent to which her mother is financially tied to and dependent on her father. She explained her mother is currently living in Mbeya in a property owned by her father and that she has throughout her life been reliant on her father. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s mother is and has been financially dependent on the applicant’s father since her birth.
The applicant raised a dual concern about being abused by her father if she returns to live with him or her family, and a concern about being able to subsist in Tanzania without family support. The applicant explained once a person is cut off from her father in Tanzania, they cannot come in the family at all and can’t get comfortable and can’t get involved with anyone unless he has approved it. She explained any relationship you have with anyone is gone.
She explained her father recently asked her on a phone call if she was going to return for his wedding. She said when she responded she is not sure and she is sorting her life out, he threatened her with severing financial ties and then sent her financial documents to sign ending her involvement in his company. The applicant explained she has no connection to his company and obtains no income from it but believes she may have been set up with some shares when she was younger. She indicated her father used it as a threat in the event she did not return to Tanzania.
The Tribunal discussed with the applicant what she believes her father may do if she were cut off from the family, and if she believed he would continue to harm her. She stated she believes he would continue to harm her, including physically, and that she does not know what he is capable of. She expressed concerns about his ability to impact her employment, housing, and connections in other communities given his prominent profile across Tanzania. The applicant explained she has discussed with her father what her life would be in Tanzania and whether she would need to be under her father, and he had stated she has to be, stating she could not do without him, and insinuating her other siblings who had attempted to run away were not ok. She expressed concerns that if her father used connections to find out about her sister in [Country 1], he would be able to find out information about her in Tanzania.
The Tribunal explored with the applicant what her father’s circumstances in Tanzania are. She explained he is a prominent person with many businesses, wealth, and connections due to his support of communities, and owing to his [political] position. The applicant stated her father was a [politician], has family and properties in Mbeya and Dar Es Salaam, and that her father goes back and forth to Mbeya from Dar Es Salaam regularly.
Whilst the Tribunal found the applicant’s evidence at hearing to be persuasive, detailed, and drawn from specific personal examples, which often caused the applicant to exhibit physical distress in detailing her past history of abuse, it did have some concerns about the applicant’s return travel to Tanzania after her arrival in Australia in 2009, given the history of family abuse she experienced from her father. The Tribunal also had some concerns that the applicant had not raised her claimed family violence from her father before the Departmental delegate made their decision on 15 March 2021.
The Tribunal raised with the applicant at hearing that s 367A of the Act requires it to draw an inference unfavourable to the credibility of her claims or evidence not raised or presented before the Departmental delegate made their decision, unless the Tribunal is satisfied there is a reasonable explanation as to why she did not raise the claims at that time. She explained to the Tribunal she was not sure what she was meant to put in her protection visa application, and it was opening up at counselling and talking about her past that enabled her to draw on other experiences in Tanzania. She stated discussing those things had been challenging and even when talking to her counsellor and writing things down for them she found it difficult. The applicant explained she didn’t have any support at the time of her protection visa application and so didn’t know to provide that information. The Tribunal considered the applicant’s response and found it persuasive in the context of the applicant’s cultural upbringing in Tanzania, where there is reportedly a high rate of gender-based violence driven by social norms and low levels of women’s economic independence and education[1], and when considering her emerging awareness of her history of abuse, and capacity to discuss it, as documented in [Dr A]’s psychological report.
[1] ‘Tanzania Can Do More to Protect Women and Girls by Urgently Addressing Gaps in Efforts to Combat Gender-based Violence’, World Bank Group, 5 April 2022.
The Tribunal had the benefit before the hearing of reading [Dr A]’s psychological report. [Dr A]’s report details the applicant is experiencing the symptoms of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Within that report [Dr A] provides a detailed outline of the applicant’s scores on the Detailed Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress (DAPS), conducted on 6 September 2024, including [Dr A]’s assessment of those scores in the context of the applicant’s symptoms and profile. [Dr A] comments that the applicant’s overall AV score in the DAPS indicates she is experiencing significant posttraumatic avoidance symptoms, suggestive of withdrawal, apathy, emotional numbing, and a potential reluctance to discuss symptoms.
The Tribunal also considered the applicant’s Departmental interview, where the applicant had stated she did not have a good relationship in Tanzania with her father. In that interview she spoke of having trauma that lived in her. The applicant was not provided with legal assistance in respect of her initial protection visa application or represented at her Departmental interview. At hearing she explained a former friend assisted her with her protection visa application. Whilst the applicant has stated she did not know to particularise her history of family abuse in her protection visa application, the Tribunal is prepared to accept the applicant has consistently referred to a strained relationship with her father throughout her evidence.
Considering each of these factors the Tribunal does not draw an unfavourable credibility inference in relation to the late raising of her claims relating to family violence.
The Tribunal also raised with the applicant at hearing its concern that she has claimed a history of abuse from her father dating back to her childhood, yet she had not claimed protection in Australia until 2016, and she had returned to Tanzania after her arrival in Australia in 2009 where she had further contact with her father. She stated in response she was not aware at first in Australia that she could claim protection, or that she could get support for these kinds of things. In relation to her contact with her father and travel to Tanzania, she stated as much as she is afraid of him, she still wanted a relationship with him in a way, and she had been encouraged by her Reverand at her church to maintain contact with him. She stated there was a time she did not speak to him, but as much as she didn’t want to be a part of his life, she still wished they had a good relationship and she had hoped for a better outcome. The applicant explained each time she had a different experience with her father, and she knew she was coming back to Australia, and at some point, was depressed and didn’t know how to deal with things. The Tribunal considered the applicant’s responses and whilst it has some reservations about the applicant’s return travel to Tanzania given the abuse she experience from her father, in the context of the literature on domestic and family violence, which indicates the ongoing trauma and mental health impacts of coercive control[2], and the applicant’s own emerging awareness that she was in an abusive family dynamic and that her experience of abuse from her father was not normal, the Tribunal is prepared to accept her responses.
[2] Susanne Lohmann, Sean Cowlishaw, Luke Ney, Meaghan O’Donnell, Kim Felmingham, ‘The Trauma and Mental Health Impacts of Coercive Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’, Trauma Violence Abuse, 13 April 2023, 25(1), 630-647.
The Tribunal considered the applicant’s evidence throughout the process and her responses to its concerns. The Tribunal found her evidence to be internally consistent, spontaneous, connected to specific times and places and her personal circumstances. The Tribunal accepts the applicant was consistently physical, emotionally, and financially abused by her father in Tanzania. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s father has attempted arrange a marriage for her in the past and that he has consistently discussed her getting married in Tanzania whilst she has been in Australia. The Tribunal accepts the applicant has been verbally harassed and financially abused by her father since her arrival in Australia. The Tribunal accepts the applicant is a single uncircumcised woman. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s account of her father’s abuse of her siblings. At hearing the applicant explained, and the Tribunal accepts, if she returned to Tanzania, she would return to Dar Es Salaam.
Fear of harm as a single woman
The applicant raised broader concerns at hearing about her capacity to subsist in Tanzania as a single woman and the harm she may experience in the broader community as a woman who has transgressed accepted social norms and who has no family support.
She stated if she was cut off from her father it would be difficult for her to get a job and live her life as normal. She stated she has not lived in Tanzania since she was [age] years of age, and she is not sure what life is like there. The applicant raised it is different in Tanzania and if you have no relatives, no where to go, no housing, then that is it for you. She expressed concerns about being able to find work as she has no family connections to rely on and no relevant experience in Tanzania. She stated jobs in Tanzania are obtained by knowing someone and it would be hard to succeed given she would know no one. She raised concerns that if she could not find work, she would have no one to rely on, as her mother is not well off and is herself reliant on her father. She stated she would need something that would work to survive, otherwise she would have no support from anyone.
The applicant also raised concerns that her father is a prominent person in Dar Es Salaam and across Tanzania and everyone would know everything. She stated she would get to the airport, and everyone would know whose daughter she is, and it would be very difficult wherever she goes if she has defied her father. The applicant raised concerns her father would get to her wherever she went and make things difficult for her if he wanted to. She was clear in her evidence that she would not be safe returning to his property in Mbeya where her mother resides.
In discussing whether the applicant could subsist in another part of Tanzania as a single woman, such as [a city], the applicant raised concerns about her father’s connections across Tanzania, including his shop in [this city], his [political career], and her ability to be safe as a woman in a rural or regional place in Tanzania where she does not know what the life is like and has no support.
The applicant stated she is now [age], does not have children, and she does not think she wants to have children. She expressed concerns that there is a stigma around that in Tanzania and she would be isolated because of her views. She expressed concerns that she would be abused and taken advantage of as a single woman who has gone against what people believe in. The applicant discussed general concerns about being a woman in Tanzania, and that if she were single and lived alone, there would be a high risk to her of being raped, sexually abused, and assaulted.
The Tribunal accepts the applicant would be returning to Tanzania as a single [age] year old woman who has never married and who has no intention to get married or have any children in the reasonably foreseeable future.
The applicant’s mental health
The applicant raised at hearing that she fears she will not obtain appropriate mental health support in Tanzania and that her mental health will deteriorate. She explained in Tanzania mental health is not a thing, and people cope in whatever way they can. She stated there is no support and most people don’t believe in mental health and she herself didn’t understand what she was going through until she came to Australia. She explained she thought what she had gone through with her parents and the abuse she experienced with her father was normal as that is normal in Tanzania.

At hearing the applicant explained she has disclosed her mental health struggles to her father in the past, and he laughed at her. She expressed concerns that he would segregate her, including due to her mental health, and that he would continue to talk about her and verbally harass and berate her publicly. She feared she would not be able to access therapies and that her mental health would deteriorate in that environment.
In his report [Dr A] states an opinion that the applicant may be experiencing symptoms of Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and provides a diagnosis of that condition, along with anxiety and depression, and emotional regulation issues and relationship difficulties. He recommends psychotherapy in the form of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). [Dr A] states that the applicant is currently engaging in psychological treatment and that she had attended treatment since 26 August 2024.
The Tribunal gives weight to [Dr A]’s report. The report contains a series of assessment conducted over 26 August 2024 to 6 September 2024, with [Dr A]’s diagnosis and observations provided across five face-to-face appointments and in the context of detailed assessment results. Whilst based on self-reported symptoms and a narrative of events from the applicant, [Dr A] provides a validity assessment for the applicant’s assessment results, providing that overall the applicant’s endorsements across the assessments do not suggest that she is attempting to portray herself in an especially negative or pathological manner. The findings and scores as detailed in full in [Dr A]’s report are consistent with the applicant’s evidence at hearing as to the impact of her mental health on her.
The Tribunal accepts [Dr A] has diagnosed the applicant with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and that [Dr A] has recommended the applicant undertake CBT. The Tribunal accepts the applicant is currently engaging in psychological treatment for Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Does the applicant satisfy the refugee criterion for protection?
The applicant claims if she returns to Tanzania, she will be harmed by her father who continues to exert control over all aspects of her life and who wants her to get married. She also claims she will be harmed as a single woman who is unmarried, a single woman who is uncircumcised, a woman who is experiencing mental health symptoms, and in respect of her capacity to obtain an income and subsist where she has no family support.
The Tribunal has accepted the applicant was consistently physically, emotionally, and financially abused by her father in Tanzania. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant’s father has attempted to arrange a marriage for her in the past and that he has discussed her getting married consistently whilst she has been in Australia. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant has been verbally harassed and financially abused by her father since her arrival in Australia. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant is a single uncircumcised woman. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant’s father has abused and harassed her family members, including her step-sisters and female cousins. The Tribunal has accepted if she were to return to Tanzania, she would return to Dar Es Salaam.
The Tribunal has accepted the applicant has been diagnosed with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, that the applicant is undertaking psychotherapy for this condition, and that [Dr A] has recommended ongoing CBT.
To meet the refugee criterion, a person must have a well-founded fear of persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in s 5J(1)(a), namely race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
The criterion in s 5J(1)(a) contains a subjective requirement, that an applicant must in fact hold a fear of being persecuted, whilst s 5J(1)(b) imposes an objective standard, that there must be a real chance of that fear being realised and the person being persecuted.
The Tribunal has considered the findings above, and having regard to the findings above, its assessment of the applicant’s future conduct in Tanzania and relevant country information as outlined below, the Tribunal is satisfied there is a real chance that she will suffer serious harm upon return to Tanzania in the reasonably foreseeable future.
Country information before the Tribunal indicates social norms in Tanzania tolerate gender based violence and perpetuate unequal relations based on gender, with women and girls the primary victims of gender based violence. Gender based violence is widespread in Tanzania, with approximately 40% of women aged 15 to 49 having experienced physical violence and 17% having experienced sexual violence during their lifetimes[3]. A Tanzanian Demographic and Health Survey indicates among women reporting non-partner violence, the most commonly reported perpetrators are the respondents’ immediate family members, including their fathers[4].
[3] Ministry of Health, Community Development, Gender, Elderly, and Children (MOHCDGEC), Ministry of Health (MOH), National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Office of Chief Government Statistician (OCGS), and ICF. 2016. Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey and Malaria Indicator Survey 2015–2016. Dar es Salaam: MOHDGEC and NBS, Zanzibar: MOH and OCGS, and Rockville, MD: ICF.
[4] Seema Vyas, ‘Violence Against Women in Tanzania and its Association with Health-Care Utilisation and Out-Of-Pocket Payments: An Analysis of the 2015 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey’, East African Health Research Journal, 29 November 2019, 3(2), 125-133.
It is reported gender-based violence in Tanzania commonly includes physical violence, neglect, sexual abuse, harassment, exploitation, property grabbing, manipulation and shameful acts, economic exploitation, psychological torture, and femicide[5]. Barriers to fighting gender based violence are reported to include delay in reporting cases, premature withdrawal of cases, difficulty in gathering evidence, inadequate professional training, reluctance of victims to open up, and limited robust equipment and special rooms[6].
[5] Venance E. Kalumanga, ‘The Role of Police Gender Desk in Fighting Gender-Based Violence in Tanzania, A Reflection from Dar Es Salaam Region’, Journal of Policy and Development Studies, Volume 16, Issue 1, 2024.
[6] Venance E. Kalumanga, ‘The Role of Police Gender Desk in Fighting Gender-Based Violence in Tanzania, A Reflection from Dar Es Salaam Region’, Journal of Policy and Development Studies, Volume 16, Issue 1, 2024.
There is no definition of domestic violence or stalking under Tanzanian law. Nor does Tanzanian law contain any provisions ordering abusers to stay away from victims of domestic violence[7]. The law prohibits assault but does not specifically prohibit domestic violence. The United States Department of State report that domestic violence against women is widespread, and the police rarely investigate such cases[8]. They also report:
Authorities rarely prosecuted persons who abused women. Persons close to the survivors, such as relatives and friends, were most likely to be the perpetrators. Many defendants who appeared in court were set free because of corruption in the judicial system, lack of evidence, poor investigations, or poor evidence preservation.
There were some government efforts to combat gender based violence. Police increased the number of gender and child desks in regions throughout the country to support survivors… Despite government efforts, reports of gender-based violence increased[9].
[7] ‘Fighting Domestic Violence’, Pro Bono Initiative, Africa, Tanzania Domestic Violence Legislation, Baker McKenzie, 2021.
[8] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
[9] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
Rape and FGM are also reported to be prevalent but rarely prosecuted[10]. Although the High Court of Tanzania banned marriage for girls under eighteen in 2019, forced marriages still occur, with 29% of girls in Tanzania reported to be married by eighteen years of age[11]. Tanzania’s adolescent fertility rate is more than twice the global average[12]. Although FGM is illegal on girls under the age of eighteen, there are reports this practice still continues, particularly in rural communities and on girls below the age of one or after thirteen years of age, although the statistics suggest the practice is decreasing over time[13].
[10] Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2024: Tanzania.
[11] ‘The Prevalence of Forced Marriage in Tanzania’, Freedom United, 21 September 2024.
[12] Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2024: Tanzania.
[13] ‘FMG in Tanzania’, 28 Too Many, Country Profile Update, July 2020.
Country information indicates despite the presence of various laws such as the Penal Code of Tanzania and rules under the Law of Marriage Act, gender-based violence has been increasing and ineffective laws have played a major role in that increase. It is reported whilst the National Gender Policy has been in place since 1997, it has not been supported since its inception by an implementation framework with attendant resources[14]. Although the Tanzanian authorities have paid increasing attention to addressing gender based violence, including implementing a National Plan of Action to end violence against women and children, it is reported the government’s efforts are lagging due to a lack of core oversight, weak institutional capacities, and limited infrastructure[15].
[14] Rubanzibwa Anitha, ‘An Appraisal of the Legal Obligations Vested to Tanzania and the Legal Challenges Facing the Prohibition of Gender-Based Violence in Tanzania’, Journal of Legal Studies and Research, 8 December 2023, Vol 9, Issue 6, 310-325.
[15] ‘Tanzania Can Do More to Protect Women and Girls by Urgently Addressing Gaps in Efforts to Combat Gender-based Violence’, World Bank Group, 5 April 2022.
It is reported constitutional principles are contradicted by customary laws in Tanzania, which are usually applied in rural areas and deny women equal opportunities in certain instances. In addition, marriage, divorce, and inheritance are regulated by religious, traditional or state institutions, according to citizens’ choice[16]. These laws and practices are reported to favour men over women[17]. Exposure to gender based violence in Tanzania is reportedly exacerbated by high rates of early marriage and childbirth, low levels of economic independence for women, and low levels of education amongst women, with social norms and structures the main drivers[18]. The National Plan of Action refers to the difficulty of achieving gender equality where social norms allow and encourage violence and when norms perpetuate unequal relations based on gender[19].
[16] Bertelsmann Stiftung 2022 Country Report: Tanzania, 23 February 2022, 7 & 26.
[17] Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2024: Tanzania.
[18] ‘Tanzania Gender Assessment (English)’, M. Yaa Pokua Afriyie Oppong, Inaam Ul Haq, Gemma Joan Nifasha Todd, World Bank Group, 30 March 2022, 11.
[19] ‘National Plan of Action to End Violence Against Women and Children in Tanzania 2017/18 – 2021/22’, UNICEF, December 2016, 18-19.
A body of research indicates family violence, including from parents, is about control[20]. Studies indicate women experience higher rates of repeated victimisation, are much more likely to be seriously hurt, and are more likely to experience higher levels of fear and are more likely to be subjected to coercive and controlling behaviours[21]. In Tanzania, studies in specific districts have illustrated the unequal power dynamic between men and women created by the patriarchal society contributes to gender based violence, as well as the restriction of the economic and social participation, employment, financial resources, autonomy, and control of women[22].
[20] Amy Warren, Barbara Blundell, and Rebecca Waters, ‘Exploring Categories of Family Violence Across the Lifespan: A Scoping Review’, Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 25(2)(, 965-981; Benbow S. M., Bhattacharyya S., Kingston P. (2018). What’s in a name? Family violence involving older adults. Journal of Adult Protection, 20(5–6), 187–192.
[21] Walby, S. and Towers, J, ‘Untangling the concept of coercive control: Theorizing domestic violent crime’, Criminology & Criminal Justice, 2018, Vol 18, Issue 1; Dobash, R.P. and Dobash, R.E, ‘Women’s violence to men in intimate relationships. Working on a Puzzle’, British Journal of Criminology, 2004, 44(3).
[22] Patric Matage, Adam Matiko Charles, Elizabeth Sulluo Saqware, Violeth Amon Chonya, ‘The Impact of Gender Based Violence on Women Life in Monduli District, Tanzania’, International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, December 2023, Vol 6, No 12.
It is reported cultural norms often contribute to women being unwilling or unable to disclose gender based violence, particularly where society perceives those violent acts to be normal incidences[23]. Socio-cultural barriers to reporting gender-based violence in Tanzania are reported to include women’s lack of awareness of their fundamental right to live free of violence and to seek justice in cases of violence, the community’s acceptance of violence as ‘normal’, women’s fear of being blamed for reporting, and fear of the social and economic consequences that may result from reporting, including being left without financial support[24]. Other studies indicate people in Tanzania have little awareness of what domestic violence is, despite government and stakeholder efforts to combat violence[25]. Gender based violence in Tanzania is rarely reported in the media, with gender based violence media in Tanzania reportedly having little relevance and a low contribution to reducing gender based violence in the country[26].
[23] Matoy, L.S, Tarimo, F.S, Kosia, E.M, Mkunda, J.J, Weisser, M, & Mtenga, S, ‘Healthcare Workers’ Experiences and Challenges in Managing Gender-Based Violence Among HIV-Positive Women Living in Southern, Tanzania: A Qualitative Study’, HIV/AIDS – Research and Palliative Care, 2024, 16, 275-287.
[24] Jennifer McCleary-Sills, Sophie Namy, Joyce Nyoni, Datius Rweyemamu, Adrophina Salvatory, Ester Steven, ‘Help-Seeking Pathways and Barriers for Survivors of Gender-based Violence in Tanzania: Results from a Study in Dar Es Salaam, Mbeya, and Iringa Regions’, 2013.
[25] Magesa, Rehema John, ‘Community Awareness of Domestic Violence in Arumeru District, Arusha, Tanzania’, Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence, 2024, Vol. 9, Issue 1, Article 6.
[26] Hamad, Ali Haji, ‘Assessing the Content Relevance of Gender-Based Violence News Articles in Tanzanian Newspapers on Reducing the Problem’, Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 2024, 22 (11), 40-55.
Women leaving situations of gender-based violence are often reliant on extended family for their livelihoods[27]. It is reported Tanzanian family structures exhibit strong intergenerational solidarity, with many families living in large households with extended family members of different ages[28]. It is reported limited social welfare is available. Whilst Tanzania has witnessed an expansion of social protection arrangements for informal sector workers, women face restrictions in accessing social protection, including low contribution capacity, ineffective targeting mechanisms under social assistance, and limited reach of legal instruments applicable only to formal employment[29]. The primary social protection program, the cash transfer program ‘Productive Social Safety Nets’, includes bi-monthly cash transfers to beneficiaries, determined based on the household’s eligibility considering participation in savings groups where there is labour capacity, and children under eighteen in the household[30]. Social protection programs are reported to be underfunded relative to the needs of the population[31].
[27] Ayala Wineman, ‘Women’s welfare and livelihoods outside of marriage: evidence from rural Tanzania’, Review of Economics of the Household, September 2019,
[28] Paskas Wagana, ‘Strengthening Family Bonds and Promoting Rural Development: The Impact of Universal Pensions in Tanzania’, BAILEO: Jurnal Sosial Humaniora, May 2024, Volume 1, Number 3.
[29] Roosa Amanda Lambin, Milla Nyyssola, ‘Tanzanian social police in the new millennium – a cross-sectoral analysis from a gender perspective’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 19 January 2024, Volume 44, No 13/14, 49-67.
[30] Tanzania Conditional Cash Transfer, The Transfer Project, accessed at on 26 November 2024.
[31] Mohamed Ihsan Ajwad, Miglena Abels, Marina Novikova, Muderis Abdulahi Mohammed, ‘Financing Social Protection in Tanzania’, The World Bank, 2018.
More broadly, country information before the Tribunal indicates sexual and labour exploitation remain problems in Tanzania[32]. Tanzania has one of the highest gender wage gaps in East and Southern Africa[33]. Although sexual harassment of women in the workplace is prohibited under the law, police reportedly rarely investigated reported cases and the government rarely enforced applicable laws[34]. Women report experiencing sexual exploitation in order to obtain relief and privileges at work[35]. In rural areas, women faced significant employment disadvantages due to cultural, historical and educational factors, such as cultural norms discouraging women form asserting opinions to men and from pursuing higher education[36]. Country information indicates where women are employed, particularly in informal industries such as domestic work, they are often reliant on family members and agencies and brokers for transportation and to get connected to different employers[37].
[32] Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2024: Tanzania.
[33] Roosa Amanda Lambin, Milla Nyyssola, ‘Tanzanian social police in the new millennium – a cross-sectoral analysis from a gender perspective’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 19 January 2024, Volume 44, No 13/14, 49-67.
[34] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
[35] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
[36] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
[37] Polycarp Africanus Kerega, ‘Exploration of the Means of Getting to the City and Getting Employed among Young Female Domestic Workers in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania’, Open Journal of Social Sciences, April 2019, Vol 7, No 4.
The Tribunal considered the country information referred to above, the applicant’s evidence, the Tribunal’s findings as set out above, and the applicant’s circumstances on return to Tanzania. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant has experienced ongoing physical, emotional, verbal, and financial abuse from her father in the past in Tanzania, and that her father has continued to berate, verbally harass her, and threaten her with financial harm on return to Tanzania whilst she has resided in Australia. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant’s father has attempted to exert control over multiple aspects of her siblings’ lives in Tanzania, restricting their ability to marry, tying them to him financially, and restricting their access to any means of family support if they do not comply with his wishes. The applicant would be returning to Tanzania without any ongoing financial support, where her mother is financially reliant on her father, and in circumstances where she herself would be financially reliant on her father. The Tribunal has accepted the applicant would be returning to Dar Es Salaam, where her father resides and owns a business.
The Tribunal is satisfied there is a real chance the applicant’s father will continue to seek to harm her if she returns to Tanzania in the reasonably foreseeable future. The Tribunal is satisfied this harm will take the form of verbal harassment, emotional abuse, physical harm, attempts to arrange a marriage for the applicant in the Tanzanian community, and financial abuse. The degree to which the applicant’s father has continued to exert control over her siblings, and repeatedly verbally berated her and referenced her need to be under his control in Tanzania, even whilst she has been in Australia, indicates to the Tribunal an intensity of interest in surveying and controlling her on return to Tanzania.

The applicant has expressed a clear intention that she does not want to get married, which is directly in opposition to the desire of her father and cultural norms in Tanzanian society. The pattern with which the applicant’s father has harmed the applicant in the past when she has not complied with his demands or wishes indicates to the Tribunal she is at risk of continued abuse on return to Tanzania in the reasonably foreseeable future when she refuses his suggestions as to an arranged cultural marriage. The applicant gave persuasive and detailed evidence as to the extent to which her father has physically and emotionally abused her for other perceived transgressions, with his behaviour oscillating between normal to extreme anger over small incidents. The Tribunal is satisfied the applicant is at risk of continued emotional and physical abuse from her father on return to Tanzania where her behaviours or actions do not align with the wishes or expectations of her father.
The Tribunal considered the applicant’s circumstances if she leaves or is cut off from her father in Dar Es Salaam. The Tribunal considers, given the extent to which her father has maintained control over aspects of her siblings’ lives despite cutting them off financially, that he would continue to harass and harm her in Dar Es Salaam even if she were formally ostracised and isolated from her extended family. Additionally, the Tribunal finds the applicant’s profile as a single woman without family support in Tanzania places her at significant risk of gender-based violence in the broader community in Tanzania, including in Dar Es Salaam.
The country information indicates women in Tanzania experience sexual harassment and sexual exploitation in the workplace and high rates of sexual violence and gender based violence more broadly. It also provides family networks are often critical supports in facilitating housing and employment for women. The applicant, if cut off from her father, would have no family support on which to rely to find housing, employment, and to meet her essential day to day needs. The applicant is a single woman with Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. [Dr A] reports potential symptoms for the applicant of depression, anxiety, emotional regulation issues, relationship difficulties, difficulty handling stress, dissociation, trust problems, memory problems, and executive functioning issues. In circumstances where the applicant would have no family connections to rely on to obtain housing and employment, has not lived in Tanzania for over fourteen years, and has a significant mental health condition, the Tribunal find the applicant’s risk of being sexually exploited in the workplace, being a victim of gender based violence in the community, and of being sexually exploited to obtain essential services is heightened.
Considering the above, the Tribunal accepts the applicant faces a real chance of gender based violence from the Tanzanian community and family violence from her father in Tanzania in the reasonably foreseeable future. The feared harm includes significant physical harassment and physical ill-treatment which the Tribunal is satisfied amounts to serious harm in accordance with s 5J(4) of the Act.
Whilst the applicant outlined at hearing that her father harmed all her step-siblings in Tanzania, and that her father continued to verbally harass her brother, it is only her stepsisters that he has continued to pervasively target, follow, manipulate, financially abuse, and control. The Tribunal finds the harm directed at the applicant is gendered. It concerns her capacity and willingness to marry, her ability to obtain her own finances as distinct from her father, threats that she will be destitute without her father, and verbal harassment and physical harm on account of her willingness to defy cultural and societal norms imposed on women by men. The Tribunal finds the harm directed at her more broadly in the community is also gendered, with her being a target of sexual and physical violence, harassment, and discrimination on account of her status as a woman.

100. Considering the evidence before it and the country information referred to above, the Tribunal finds the harm the applicant fears from her father and in the Tanzanian community is due to her status as a single woman, for the reason of her gender, and that the essential and significant reason for the harm is her membership of the particular social group of ‘single women’. This is a group which is identifiable by the shared innate or immutable characteristics of gender and marital status and the common characteristics or attributes are not a shared fear of persecution. The Tribunal finds the applicant shares these characteristics.
101. The Tribunal is satisfied that the gender based harm the applicant fears from her father and within the Tanzanian community involves systematic and discriminatory conduct, as required by s 5J(4)(c) of the Act, with the persecution directed at the applicant being deliberate, non-random, and intentional as an attempt to control her and as retaliation for her defiance of accepted gender-based cultural norms and traditions.
102. In accordance with s 5J(2) of the Act, a person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if effective protection measures are available to the person in the receiving country. Section 5LA(1) provides that effective protection measures are available if protection against persecution could be provided to the person by either the relevant State, or a party or organisation (including an international organisation) that controls the relevant State or a substantial part of its territory, and that State, party or organisation is willing and able to offer such protection. Section 5LA(2) provides a relevant State, party or organisation is taken to be able to offer protection against persecution to a person if the person can access the protection, and the protection is durable and, in the case of protection by the relevant State, the protection consists of an appropriate criminal law, a reasonably effective police force and an impartial judicial system
103. As set out above, country information indicates the authorities in Tanzania rarely prosecuted persons who abused women, with many defendants who appeared in court were set free because of corruption in the judicial system, lack of evidence, poor investigations, or poor evidence preservation[38]. Although laws exist under the Tanzanian Criminal Code in relation to rape, attempted rape, and indecent assault on females, it is reported protection of human rights in Tanzania is worsened by a lack of effective police investigations, a failure to prosecute and convict perpetrators, intimidation and discrimination, the high level of corruption and limited awareness of the basic concept of human rights among the population[39]. Lower-level courts are reported to be especially affected by political influence and corruption[40].
[38] United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2023: Tanzania.
[39] ‘Fighting Domestic Violence’, Pro Bono Initiative, Africa, Tanzania Domestic Violence Legislation, Baker McKenzie, 2021.
[40] Freedom in the world
104. Considering the country information the Tribunal is satisfied that effective protection measures against gender-based violence would not be provided to the applicant by the Tanzanian State. Although Tanzanian authorities exist, the country information indicates the authorities do not prosecute gender-based offences against women, and that corruption in the police and judicial system is high. Given this, the Tribunal finds they are not willing to offer effective protection. The Tribunal is satisfied that effective state protection is not available to the applicant in Tanzania.
105. The Tribunal considered whether the applicant would face a real chance of gender based violence as a single woman across all areas of Tanzania. Section 5J(1)(c) of the Act provides the real chance of persecution must relate to all areas of the receiving country.
106. The country information referred to above indicates gender based violence occurs across Tanzania. If the applicant did not return to Dar Es Salaam or Mbeya where she has some family connections or was cut off from her family if she attempted to leave her father’s control, she would have no family support to rely on, no established income or employment opportunities, and no housing or community connections. She would be returning without ongoing mental health treatment. In these circumstances, where the applicant has no family and social connections within which to source essential services and employment, and considering the country information referred to above, the Tribunal finds the applicant would be exposed to a high degree of sexual exploitation and gender based violence.
107. The applicant outlined in her written statement that her father is an influential person in Tanzania, well known across the country, and that he owns [businesses] in multiple locations across Tanzania. The applicant explained he has [businesses] in Mbeya. She also said he has businesses in [locations]. The applicant explained her father’s businesses contain his name in their title. At hearing she explained her father was also a [politician]. She explained given he is well off and supports people in the city and in Mbeya he is well known and regarded.
108. On 29 November 2024 the applicant provided the Tribunal with corroborative evidence illustrating her father was a [politician] and of his various business entities. Although the documentary evidence provided to the Tribunal does not indicate the exact location of the applicant’s father’s businesses, the applicant has consistently maintained in her evidence that her father travels frequently across Tanzania and between Mbeya and Dar Es Salaam in particular. The supporting evidence corroborates the applicant’s evidence as to the type of businesses the applicant’s father runs and the names of the businesses. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s father maintains two residences across Mbeya and Dar Es Salaam and that he would also travel at times to [other cities] for business purposes.
109. Given the degree to which the applicant’s father has demonstrated an intention to exert coercive control over the applicant, as he has done with other female family members, and the extent to which the applicant’s father travels throughout Africa, the Tribunal finds the applicant’s father would continue to harass the applicant and attempt to control her housing, employment, and financial affairs in all areas of the receiving country. The Tribunal is prepared to accept on the evidence before it that the applicant’s father would physically harm her, verbally berate her, and use his connections across Tanzania to restrict her ability to obtain essential services, employment, and ultimately subsist, if she returned to Tanzania and did not reside with him or under his control in Dar Es Salaam.
110. Given the above factors, the Tribunal is satisfied on the basis of the applicant’s circumstances, that the applicant faces a real chance of serious harm in all areas of Tanzania.
111. The Tribunal finds the applicant is unable to take reasonable steps to modify her behaviour on return to Tanzania to avoid a real chance of persecution.
112. The Tribunal finds that the applicant is outside the country of her nationality, and owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, she is unable or unwilling to avail herself of the protection of that country. Therefore, the Tribunal finds that she meets the definition of refugee in s 5H(1) of the Act.
113. As the applicant meets the definition in s 5H(1), the Tribunal is satisfied that she is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under s 36(2)(a).
Does the applicant have a right to enter and reside in a third country?
114. On the evidence before it, the Tribunal finds s 36(3) does not apply. The applicant does not have a right to enter and reside in a third country.
Conclusion
115. 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
116. 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.

Date of hearing: 20 November 2024
Representative for the applicant: Ms Nabilah Reza
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.
…