2119079 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a woman from Ethiopia, who claimed she would suffer social discrimination, violence, and threats from her husband's family due to her father's history of leprosy. She also feared forced separation from her husband and the inability to subsist, as well as potential female genital mutilation for her daughter. The applicant, of Amhara ethnicity, argued that Ethiopian authorities would be unable to provide protection due to the widespread cultural belief that leprosy is a curse and the difficulty in policing such discrimination in various public and private spheres.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically considering her claims of persecution based on her family history of leprosy and her ethnicity. This involved assessing the real chance of significant harm she and her daughter would face if returned to Ethiopia, the adequacy of state protection, and the feasibility of relocation within the country. The court also had to consider the impact of the deteriorating security situation in Ethiopia on the applicant's claims and whether the country information available adequately reflected these developments.

The court reasoned that the applicant had established a history of isolation, harassment, and violence from her in-laws due to her father's leprosy, which was culturally perceived as a curse. It found that this behaviour was tolerated and encouraged within Ethiopian society and by authorities, making effective protection unlikely. The court also noted the significant deterioration of the security situation in Ethiopia, including widespread ethnic violence and foreign intervention, which superseded earlier country information. Consequently, the court concluded that the applicant faced a real risk of significant harm, including potential separation from her husband and harm to her daughter, and that relocation within Ethiopia was not a viable option.

The Tribunal remitted the decision for reconsideration, finding that the applicant's claims warranted further assessment in light of the updated country information and the evolving security landscape in Ethiopia.