2203843 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the protection visa application of a Mongolian citizen. The applicant claimed to fear harm upon return to Mongolia due to domestic violence from her father, threats from her extended family who blamed her for her cousin's death, and persecution for her atheism. The delegate had previously refused the application, finding the applicant not credible regarding her claims of domestic violence, religious persecution, and harm from her cousin's family.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee or under the complementary protection provisions. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of fear of harm from her father, her extended family, and due to her atheism, and considering whether these fears were well-founded and would result in significant harm if she were returned to Mongolia. The Tribunal also had to assess the applicant's credibility in relation to these claims, taking into account potential impacts of trauma and mental health on her ability to recall events.

The Tribunal found that the delegate had not adequately considered the applicant's claims, particularly in relation to the risk of harm from her father and extended family, and the impact of her atheism. The delegate's assessment of the applicant's credibility was found to be flawed, as it did not sufficiently account for the difficulties asylum seekers may face in presenting evidence, including the effects of trauma and mental health issues. The Tribunal noted that the delegate placed undue emphasis on minor inconsistencies and a lack of documentary evidence, without giving due consideration to the applicant's consistent narrative and the inherent difficulties in substantiating claims of domestic violence and religious persecution. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remit the matter to the delegate for reconsideration.