2205045 (Refugee)

The applicant, a single gay man from Fiji, sought a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether he met the criteria for such a visa, specifically whether he had a well-founded fear of persecution or faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Fiji. The matter was before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant qualified as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) or faced a real risk of significant harm under section 36(2)(aa). This required determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or if he would suffer significant harm, which includes torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. The Tribunal also considered whether effective protection measures were available to the applicant in Fiji.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's evidence regarding his employment history in Fiji's tourism sector and that his termination was a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent travel restrictions. However, it found that any economic hardship or disparity in wages he might experience would be due to general economic conditions in Fiji, which are showing signs of recovery. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not face a real chance of serious harm for an essential and significant refugee reason, nor a real risk of significant harm, and that he would not be denied employment for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. The Tribunal also noted there was no suggestion he was a family member of someone who held a protection visa.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.