2114248 (Refugee)

The Federal Circuit Court considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa, who claimed to fear harm in Iraq due to his secular views and criticisms of extremist groups and the Iraqi government. The applicant's father had previously been shot for opposing radical parties, and the applicant himself had received threats. He had expressed his views on human rights and against radical groups at university and in his workplace, and later on social media, which he believed identified him as being against Islam and at risk of being killed by extremists.

The legal issues before the court concerned whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning refugee status, or alternatively, under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa) if there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia. The court was required to assess the applicant's claims of imputed political opinion, his secular and atheist views, and his criticisms of religious fundamentalists and government elements in Iraq, in light of available country information.

The court found that the applicant was a credible and reliable witness, providing consistent evidence over several years. While previous tribunals had accepted his secular views and criticisms, they had concluded that such views would not expose him to a real chance of serious or significant harm in Iraq based on the country information available at the time. However, the present Tribunal, considering more recent country information and other evidence, reached a different conclusion. It accepted that the applicant genuinely held strong secular beliefs, was critical of Shi'a militias, religious figures, and elements of the Iraqi government, and had expressed these views to various people and online. The Tribunal also accepted that the applicant had previously refrained from wider expression of his views to avoid harm.

The Tribunal concluded that the decision under review should be remitted for reconsideration.