2205837 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Shia Muslim of the Bangash tribe from Pakistan, sought a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Pakistan, specifically to his home village in Kurram District, or an alternative location within the country. The decision reviewed was made by the Tribunal.

The court was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as a refugee, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal. A key issue was whether it would be reasonable for the applicant to relocate to another area within Pakistan, such as Kohat, where he claimed to have tribal affiliations and a Shia population.

The court affirmed the decision not to grant the visa. The reasoning focused on the reasonableness of internal relocation. While acknowledging the applicant's fear of targeted killings and bomb blasts due to his Shia faith, particularly in his home region, the court found that the applicant could reasonably relocate to Kohat. This conclusion was based on the applicant's tribal affiliation with the Bangash tribe in Kohat, his father's standing within the community which suggested access to support networks, and the presence of a significant Shia population in Kohat, including Shia Bangash individuals. The court found insufficient evidence to support the claim that the applicant would be specifically targeted in Kohat due to his Kurram Shia identity or his father's past involvement in peace negotiations. Furthermore, the court noted that online processes were available for identity document renewal, mitigating the need for travel to potentially unsafe areas. The court concluded that the applicant had not established a real risk of significant harm that could not be avoided by reasonable relocation.