2207146 (Refugee)

[2023] AATA 2759

2207146 (Refugee) [2023] AATA 2759 (19 May 2023)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

REPRESENTATIVE:  Ms Carina Ford

CASE NUMBER:  2207146

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   Papua New Guinea

MEMBER:Jason Pennell

DATE:19 May 2023

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant satisfies s 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Statement made on 19 May 2023 at 5.52pm

CATCHWORDS
REFUGEE – protection visa – Papua New Guinea – female in PNG – gender-based violence – domestic violence – subjected to violence by partner – physical and mental health conditions – under-resourced health system – vulnerability as female and health issues – at risk of serious harm – decision under review remitted

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 5, 36, 65, 499
Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Schedule 2

CASES
Chan v MIEA (1989) 169 CLR 379
MIMA v Khawar (2002) 210 CLR
VSAI v MIMIA [2004] FCA 1602

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependants.

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1.This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 12 May 2022 to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa under s 65 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act).

2.The applicant who claims to be a citizen of Papua New Guinea, applied for the visa on 16 January 2017. The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the applicant was not a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations as outlined in s.36(2)(a) or s.36(2)(aa) and are not a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations and who holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant (s.36(2)(b) and s.36(2)(c) of the Act).

3.The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 27 April 2023 to give evidence and present arguments. In addition, the Tribunal received oral evidence via the telephone from [Ms A].

4.The applicant was represented in relation to the review by Carina Ford Immigration Lawyers, (the applicant’s solicitor). A representative of the applicant’s solicitor, Ms Nina Merlino, attended the Tribunal hearing.

CRITERIA FOR A PROTECTION VISA

5.The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s 36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s 36(2)(a), (aa), (b), or (c). That is, he or she is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.

6.Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee.

1. A person is a refugee if, in the case of a person who has a nationality, they are outside the country of their nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of that country: s 5H(1)(a). In the case of a person without a nationality, they are a refugee if they are outside the country of their former habitual residence and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, are unable or unwilling to return to that country: s 5H(1)(b).

2. Under s 5J(1), a person has a well-founded fear of persecution if they fear being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, there is a real chance they would be persecuted for one or more of those reasons, and the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of the relevant country. Additional requirements relating to a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ and circumstances in which a person will be taken not to have such a fear are set out in ss 5J(2)-(6) and ss 5K-LA, which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.

3. If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s 36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of the visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s 36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’). The meaning of significant harm, and the circumstances in which a person will be taken not to face a real risk of significant harm, are set out in ss 36(2A) and (2B), which are extracted in the attachment to this decision.

Mandatory considerations

1. In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.84, made under s 499 of the Act, the Tribunal has taken account of the ‘Refugee Law Guidelines’ and ‘Complementary Protection Guidelines’ prepared by the Department of Home Affairs, and country information assessments prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.

APPLICANT’S CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

Identity and country of reference

1. The applicant claims that he was born on [date], in [Jiwaka] Province, Papua New Guinea (PNG).[1] She claims to be citizen of PNG. The applicant provided the Department with a copy of her Papua New Guinea passport issued [in] 2016 (the passport’)[2]  and Birth Certificate issued [in] October 2016 (‘the Birth Certificate’)[3] that confirmed the applicant date and place of birth.

   [1]    Application for a protection visa dated 10 January 2019 at p.10; [file number].

   [2]    Dept File No [deleted]

   [3]    Dept File No [deleted]

2. The applicant also provided the department with a passport issued [in] 2014 (‘the first passport’) and Birth Certificate issued [in] August 2014 (‘the first Birth Certificate’)[4] which incorrectly stated that the applicant was born on [Date 2]. The applicant’s evidence[5] was that the first passport and first Birth Certificate were issued with her incorrect birth date. The applicant stated that it is common in PNG for documents, including passports and birth certificates, to contain technical errors. As a result, the applicant paid a penalty fee to have the error corrected.[6]  

   [4]    Dept File No [deleted]

   [5]    Applicant’s Statutory declaration dated 30 November 2017 at [5]; Dept File

   [6]    ibid

3. The delegate’s decision[7] refers to the country information that states historically only a small percentage of births are registered in PNG.  The delegate noted that on November 2014 the Civil Registration (Amendment) Act was passed by the PHG Parliament and in 2015 PNG launched a National Identity Card Project to issue ID cards to all PNG citizens over the age of 18 years and create a national ID register that included information relating to a person’s birth, marriages, and death. As part of the program all citizens are to be provided with birth certificates. However, it’s reported that the rollout of the program has been plagued by delays, mismanagement, and corruption.[8]  The Papua New Guinea Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Action Plan[9] noted that Papua New Guinea has the lowest birth and death registration levels in the Asia-Pacific region with less than 1 in 6 babies registered and less than 1 in 50 deaths registered. The DFAT report notes that document fraud in PNG occurs frequently particularly in relation to identity documents. In 2020, it was reported[10] that police in PNG suspect ‘rogue immigration officers are part of a crime syndicate producing fake visas and passports’ following the arrest of an Australian woman in possession of a fake visa. Based on the available country information the Tribunal accepts that only a small percentage of births in PNG are registered. In addition, the Tribunal finds and accepts that the issuing of a birth certificate is a relatively new incitive in PNG which has been affected by mismanagement by the authorities and fraud. 

   [7]    Protection Visa Decision record 12 May 2022 at p.2-3; Dept File No [deleted]

   [8]    ibid; The National, ‘Official: Register for new certificates’ 27 March 2017; The National ‘Warning on birth Certificates.’ 15 February 2017     The Papua New Guinea Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Action Plan (2020-2021)   RNZ Pacific, ‘Rogue officials suspected of producing fake PNG passports’ 4 May 2020 ww.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/415762/rogue-officials-suspected-of-producing-fake-png-passports: DFAT Report at p.25

The delegate noted[11] that the applicant provided completion certificates from [School 1][12] and [School 2][13] and [University 1][14] consistent with her having been born in [year] as claimed. Therefore, based on the applicant’s evidence, including the educational certificates provided to the department together with the country information, the Tribunal accepts and finds that the applicant was born on [date], in [PNG] as claimed.  Therefore, the Tribunal finds that she is a citizen of PNG, and as such her protection claims will be assessed against PNG as the country of reference and ‘receiving country’ respectively.

[11]   Protection Visa Decision record 12 May 2022 at p.3; Dept File No [deleted]

[12]  Dept File No [deleted]

[13]  ibid

[14]  ibid

Migration history

1. The applicant’s migration history is as follows:[15]

   [15]  Applicant’s submissions dated 20 April 2023; AAT File No 2207146 Doc ID: 10994968 10976422

Date

Event details

[September] 2014

Applicant entered Australia on tourist visa

[October] 2014

Applicant departed Australia and returned to PNG

[December] 2016

Applicant arrived in Australia

13 January 2017

Applicant lodged a Protection Visa and was granted

a Bridging Visa A.

12 May 2022

Applicant’s application for a protection visa refused by

the delegate.

17 May 2022

Applicant lodged application for review at the Tribunal.

17 February 2023

Applicant made a request to the Tribunal for

priority processing of her application due to a

deterioration of her mental health.

2 March 2023

Tribunal granted the applicant’s priority request.

Applicant’s claims for protection

16.The applicant’s claim for protection is detailed in her application for a protection visa    dated 16 January 2017. The applicant’s claims are as follows:[16]

[16]   Application for a protection visa dated 16 January 2017 at p.14; [file number]

Why did you leave that country or those countries?

‘I left the country because of domestic violence and persecution with my ex-husband, [Mr A]. [Mr A] will always fool around with ladies, com home drunk and force me to have sex. I, being afraid of HIV Aids and STD’s, said no. He punches me and beats me badly and have sex without me agreeing. I couldn’t speak asking about his whereabouts, he beats me up and threatens to kill me. I had no control over the money which I worked for. He controls my money buys few household goods and the rest he goes out with his friends drinking. If I mention anything about my money, he punches and beats me up. My neighbours hear the screams I scream, but [Mr A] threatens me not to tell anyone because he will kill me and even not go to the hospital. I used traditional medicine and warm water for the pains in my body. Emotionally I was really affected, I lost confidence in myself and very low self-esteem. I was also rejected by my family; [Mr A]’s family also rejected me and also couldn’t bring the matter to the police. My life was in threat, so I left my country PNG.’

What do you think will happen to you if you return to that country(s)?

‘My relatives will neglect me, and they society will see me as someone who has no value in society. My ex-husband, [Mr A]’s relatives will neglect me and continue restricting me from seeing my son. [Mr A] traditionally is not allowed to marry a new wife until I am dead. If he finds me, he will be very violent to me. He will kill me ot make me suffer the pains until I am dead. Because of the neglectance from my relatives, [Mr A] ‘s relatives and the police could not help because of bribery and [Mr A] taking advantage of hi dad being a policeman, he will do anything to kill me or make me suffer from pain and persecution.

Did you experience harm in that country(s)?

“Yes. Sexual abuse, my ex-husband always came back drunk and forces me to have sex without me agreement. He controls my money and do whatever he wants. He beats and punches me up when I try to talk about what he does. Emotionally, I was really affected. Keeping all thoughts to myself, I was very sick, depression, anxiety, stress and I lost my memory. I almost die in 2013. Today I still feel pain in my belly and emotionally I am still affected. I still loose confidence in myself and have very low self-esteem. Furthermore, there is a rejection from my relatives and my ex-husband relatives, and I am seen as female who has no value in the society which I feel lonely and left out in the society.

Did you seek help within the country(s) after the harm?

‘No. I was unable, or I did not try to seek help especially from the police because my ex-husband dad was a police officer and he know the policeman, so my issue won’t be dealt with. Also, even though I will go through other police officers they will be bribed by [Mr A]’s family so still my complain want be entertained.’

Did you move, or try to move to another part of the country(s) to seek safety?

‘Yes. 2014 I recovered slowly after my illness; I was [working] in a remote [workplace] in Jiwaka [province]. However, my ex-husband knew that I was well and working, so he threatened to kill me. I flew to Port Moresby, keeping myself very isolated working [in] Port Moresby for 2015 until 2016 around October my ex-husband found out that I was hiding there because some of his relatives in Port Moresby must have seen me and informed him that I was in Port Moresby, so he threatened me that he will kill me as soon as he comes to Port Moresby. I tried my best to seek safety in PNG, but I couldn’t, so I left for Australia. 

Do you think you will be harmed or mistreated if you return to that country(s)?

‘Yes. My relatives neglected me, and the society see me as someone who has no value in the society. Also, my ex-husband’s relatives rejected me and will continue not allowing me seeing my kid. Traditionally, my ex-husband will not marry a new wife until I am dead. If he finds me, he will be very violent and cruel to what he had before. [Mr A] will kill me until I die, or he will violently mistreat me with his old bad attitudes, and I will suffer pain until I die.

Do you think the authorities of that country(s), can and will protect you if you go back?

‘No. Since my ex-husband dad is a police officer the authorities won’t be able to help me. In PNG, they call it a ‘wantok system.’ It is a system where they serve and listen to those who they know first. If they don’t know you, you have less chance to be helped out. Also, through bribery, I strongly believe that I will not get any help from the authorities.

Do you think you would be able to relocate within that country(s)?

‘No. I did relocate places within the country, but I couldn’t hide. because the country is too small, it took less than five (5) years for my ex-husband to find me. Therefore, I cannot relocate within the country (PNG).

1. The delegate summarised the applicant’s claim as follows:[17]

   ·     She was in an abusive relationship with her ex-boyfriend.

   ·     She had a son from his relationship. Her son was supposed to be taken care of by her ex-boyfriend’s family until she finished university. Her ex-boyfriend family did not give him back as agreed and she has not seen him since he was three days old.

   ·     She has Hepatitis B.

   ·     She fears that of she is returned to PNG she will be killed by her ex-boyfriend and her physical and mental health will deteriorate.

Applicant’s evidence

[17]   Protection Visa Decision Record dated 12 May 2022 at p.2. Dept File No [deleted]

1. The applicant’s evidence was that she was born in [Jiwaka] Province, PNG, on [date]. Her evidence was that she is a PNG citizen and that she is a Christian.

2. The applicant father died in 2008 but her mother remains living in PNG. The applicant’s mother and father both worked in PNG as [Occupation 1].  The applicant has [brothers][18] and one sister, all of whom continue to live in PNG.[19]

   [18]   Application for a protection visa dated 16 January 2017 at [42]; [file number]

   [19]  Applicants Statutory Declaration dated 30 November 2017; [file number]

3. The applicant attended [Primary] School and [High School 2] in Sandaun Province. The applicant then completed years 11 and 12 at [High School 1] in the Easter Highlands Province.[20] The applicant then attended [University 1] and completed a Bachelor [degree] in 2009.[21] In 2015 the applicant completed a [course] at [School 3] in Gabtu, PNG.[22]

   [20]   High School Certificate, [High School 1] dated [year]; [file number]

   [21]  The [University 1], Bachelor [degree] dated 11 June 2010; [file number]

   [22]  Certificate [School 3] dated 7 & 8 July 2015; [file number]

4. The applicant’s evidence to the Tribunal was that she met [Mr A][Mr A][Mr A] in or about 2007 while she was studying at the [University 1]. [Mr A] was born in Morobe Province but raised in Goroka. He was a student at the University studying for a Bachelor [degree] when they meet. In her statutory declaration[23] the applicant claims that she married [Mr A] in 2008. However, her evidence to the Tribunal was that she was never legally or customarily married to him.

   [23]   Applicants Statutory Declaration dated 30 November 2017 at [8]; [file number]

5. The applicant claims that in PNG witchcraft is practiced, sometimes known as ‘Puri Puri.’ She claims that if a man wants a woman, he will cast a spell on her to make her forget her family and friends and think only of him. The applicant claims that [Mr A] manipulated her to be with him by placing a spell on her.[24]

   [24]  Op Cit at [18]-[19]

6. The applicant’s evidence was that in or about 2007 she became pregnant.  She claims that her family became angry with her because she had broken a ‘traditional taboo’ of becoming pregnant outside of marriage.[25]  The applicant’s evidence was that her family had arranged for her to be married to a man within her own province. As a result of her becoming pregnant to [Mr A] she was not able to marry as arranged. Consequently, her family did receive the ‘set bride price’ (‘a dowry’) as planned.  The applicant’s evidence was that her family withdrew all financial support and cut all ties with her completely. As a result, she was forced to live off a small government allowance.[26] 

   [25]   Op Cit at [21]

   [26]  Op Cit at [20]

1. The applicant’s evidence was that three months after becoming pregnant, [Mr A] became violent and abusive towards her.[27] She claims that he went out with other women and forced her out of the female dormitory. The applicant’s evidence was that if she refused him, he would bash and rape her. Her girlfriend would try to help her, but it only resulted in [Mr A] abusing and threaten her.  The applicant stated that she initially did not go to the police because she was pregnant and felt that she had to stay with [Mr A].[28]

   [27]  Op Cit at [23]

   [28]   Op Cit at [26]

2. The applicant’s evidence was that she gave birth to her son in [2008]. The applicant named her son [name], but she does not know if he is still known by this name.[29] The applicant stated that after five days [Mr A]’s family came to the hospital and took her son away.[30] Her evidence was that in PNG the man controls the household. As a result, [Mr A]’s family were able to step in and take her son. At the time the applicant believed that [Mr A]’s parents took her son only to care for him while she was studying. However, he was never returned to her, and she has not seen him since.[31] The applicant claims that she did not go to the authorities because she knew they would not help. In addition, she claims that [Mr A] prevented her for visiting her son. The applicant’s evidence was that she did not know where [Mr A]’s family lived and was prevented from being able to find him.

   [29]  Op Cir at [30]

   [30]  Op Cit at [28]

   [31]  Op Cit at [28]

3. The applicant’s evidence was that in PNG the men have the power and are able to take a child away from its mother. She claims that sometimes a man’s family will take a child to break up a family. The applicant believes that [Mr A]’s family took away her child so that she would no longer be an important person in [Mr A]’s life so that he would be able to marry another person. In addition, she claims that they took her child to adversely affect her mental health.

4. The applicant’s evidence was that after the birth of her son, [Mr A] became more abusive toward her. Her evidence was that he would regularly abuse and rape her.  In addition, [Mr A] was controlling toward the applicant. He would continually check her phone for new messages and prevent her from leaving the house.

5. After completing her degree, the applicant commenced work at [a workplace] in 2010. The applicant and [Mr A] lived in the accommodation provided by the [employer].[32] The applicant’s brother [and] his wife were working at the same [workplace]. The applicant claims that [Mr A] during this time was very violent to her.  Her evidence was that on two occasions in 2010 [Mr A] beat her until she was unconscious.[33] On one occasion, the applicant’s evidence was that [Mr A] returned home drunk after being out with friends. The applicant does not know what provoked him but when he returned home, he punched, kicked, and threw the applicant to the ground. As a result of the attack the applicant suffered a swollen arm, back pain, and a dislocated arm. Despite her injuries [Mr A] did not allow her to go to hospital.[34] On another occasion, the applicant found out that [Mr A] was having an [affair]. When the applicant confronted [Mr A], he beat her up so badly that her body swelled up and she was unable to go to work for several days.[35]

   [32]   Op Cit at [36]

   [33]   Op Cit at [39]

   [34]   Op Cit at [39]

   [35]   Op Cit at [42]

6. The applicant’s evidence was that in or about 2010 the [manager] became aware of the abuse being inflicted on her. He went to the applicant’s home while she was unconscious for being beaten by [Mr A]. The applicant evidence was that when she regained consciousness, the [manager] was with [Mr A] trying to convince him to stop harming her. [Mr A] threatened the [manager] and told him to stay away, as a result she never received any help from the [manager].[36]  

   [36]   Op Cit at [40]

7. The applicant’s evidence was that [Mr A] would regularly force her to have sex.   She claims that[37] her brother witnessed [Mr A] abuse her but did nothing out of fear of being abused himself and putting his own family at risk.[38] The applicant’s evidence was that because her brother failed to help her, she has not spoken to him since arriving in Australia. She did not seek any statement from him because she did not feel comfortable speaking to him about what happened.[39]

   [37]   Op Cit at [37]

   [38]   Op Cit at [37]

   [39]   Op Cit at [37]

8. In or about 2011 the applicant claims that she was admitted to hospital for acute appendicitis and sexually transmitted infections. Her evidence was that [Mr A] refused to take medication for STI’s and as a result she continued to contract them. A report by Dr [A]dated 28 July 2017 (‘the [Dr A] report’) confirms that the applicant has tested positive for Hepatitis B.[40] The applicant’s evidence was that this was the only time the applicant was permitted by [Mr A] to attend hospital. On all other occasions she claims that he threatened to kill her if she went to hospital and instructed to her to use traditional medicine instead of modern medicine.[41] The applicant claims that she is not able to obtain a report from the hospital as they do not keep proper records. In addition, she claims that she is too scared to ask her friends to help obtain the records as [Mr A] has threatened to use violence against them in the past if they help her.

   [40]   Dr [A] of [Health clinic] GP dated 28 July 2017; AAT file No 2207146 Doc ID10976422

   [41]  Op Cit at [46]

9. In 2011, [Mr A]’s [brother] attended [a school] (grade [number]) and stayed with the applicant and [Mr A]. [Mr A] accused the applicant of having an affair with [his brother] and threw her out of the house in the early hours of the morning. He threw the applicant’s belonging out of the house and punched and beat her. The applicant’s evidence was that she spent the rest of the night at another [colleague]’s home but returned the following day as she had no other place to go.

10. In 2012, the applicant and [Mr A] moved to [Morobe] Provence so that [Mr A] could be close to his friends and extended family.  As a result, the applicant and [Mr A] got jobs [in] Morobe.[42] The applicant’s evidence was that at this time [Mr A]’s parents were living in Goroke and as a result she did not get to see her son.[43] The applicant claimed that from time to time she would visit Goroke to purchase food. Her evidence was that despite [Mr A]’s parents seeing her at the market with bruises and swollen eyes, they would ignore her.

    [42] Op Cit at [49]

    [43] Op Cit at [50]

1. The applicant’s evidence was that in 2012 and 2013 she felt alone in Morobe. She felt isolated i[and] was unable to escape as she did not have licences and there was no public transport to the town. The applicant became very ill suffering pain in her stomach and painful discharge due to the sexual abuse she suffered. The applicant claims that in 2013 she suffered severe depression. She claims that her legs and arms were numb to the extent that her body began to shut down.  The applicant’s evidence was that the [manager] realised that she was sick and arranged for her to return home to Jiwaka province to be with her family. [Mr A] realised she was sick and allowed her to return to her family. The applicant claims that [Mr A] thought she was going to die and didn’t care that she was leaving.[44]      

   [44] Op Cit at [53]

2. The applicant remained at her family’s home throughout 2013. The applicant’s evidence was that she did not work during this time as she felt too depressed and unwell. Her evidence was that her family took her to the hospital, but they did not find anything wrong. The applicant believes that she was suffering from depression. [Mr A] did not contact the applicant during 2013.

3. In 2014 the applicant started work at a remote [workplace][in] Jiwaka Province. However, she claimed that she didn’t feel safe and was scared the [Mr A] would come for her.

4. In November 2014 the applicant travelled to Australia on a tourist visa with some girlfriends who were visiting [Australia]. Her evidence was that she was not aware she could apply for a protection visa at that time. Nevertheless, her evidence was that at that time she believed her circumstances would change and as a result she would have returned to PNG despite her known that she could apply for a protection visa.

5. The applicant’s evidence was that upon her return from Australia she continued working at [the remote workplace]. However, she claims that [Mr A]’s cousin[saw] her at the market of a nearby [town]. Her evidence was that he said to her that he would tell [Mr A] that he had seen her. As a result, the applicant feared that [Mr A] would come to Jiwaka Province to find her. The applicant’s evidence was that in PNG if a woman leaves a man, he feels inferior of other men and will take his frustration out on the woman. Therefore, as soon as [Mr A] found out that she was alive and well he would feel that she had dumped him and would find her with the intention of harming her.[45]   

   [45] OP Cit at [61]

6. In December 2014 the applicant fled to went to Port Moresby to avoid [Mr A]. She worked at [a workplace] until October 2016. Her evidence was that she didn’t have any community support in Port Moresby but stayed mainly at home and kept to herself.  The applicant’s evidence was that in October 2016 [Mr A] discovered that she was living in Port Moresby.  The applicant claims that her girlfriend [was] working at the same [workplace] as [Mr A] and rang the applicant to tell her that [Mr A] had discovered that she was living in Port Moresby. She said to the applicant that [Mr A] was going travel to Port Moresby to find her. The applicant has not spoken to [her friend] since her arrival in Australia. While the applicant was still in Port Moresby [Mr A] sent her threatening text massages to her. The applicant deleted the test messages but provided the Tribunal with more recent texts that she had received after she arrived in Australia.

7. Having received the text messages from [Mr A] and being informed that he intended to go to Port Moresby to find her, the applicant feared for her safety and fled to Australia [in] December 2016. The applicant claims that she is scared that she will be seriously harmed by [Mr A] and his friends if she is returned to PNG. The applicant claims that it is considered unacceptable in PNG for a woman to leave her ‘husband’. Accordingly, she claims that [Mr A] will find her and seriously harm her if she is returned to PNG. In addition, the applicant claims that as a single woman without clan support, she will be seriously harmed if she is returned to PNG.            

Applicant’s documents

1. The applicant has provided the following documents in support of her application:

   ·ASCR letter dated 7 December 2017.[46]

   [46] Dept File No [deleted]

   ·Statutory declaration of [the applicant] dated 30 November 2017.[47]

   [47] ibid

   ·Letter of support from Dr [A] dated 28 July 2017.[48]

   [48] ibid

   ·Letter of Support from [Ms A] dated 1 September 2017.[49]

   [49] ibid

   ·Text messages dated 17-26 August 2017.[50]

   [50] ibid

   ·Country Information on PNG.[51]

   [51] ibid

   ·[School 3] ‘[Course name]’ Certificate, [July] 2015.[52]

   [52] Dept File No [deleted]

   ·The [University 1], Bachelor [degree] dated [June] 2010.[53]

   [53]   ibid

   ·Department of Education, Higher School Certificate [year].[54]

   [54]  ibid

   ·Department of Education, School Certificate [date]

   ·PNG passport.[55]

   [55]  Dept File No [deleted]

   ·Applicant’s Birth Certificate, listing applicant’s Date of Birth [Date 2].[56]

   [56]  Dept File No [deleted]

   ·Applicant’s Birth Certificate, listing applicant’s Date of Birth [date].[57]

   [57]   ibid

   ·Letter from [name deleted] dated 5 May 2021.

   ·Letter from [named organisation] dated 6 May 2021.

   ·ABC News, ‘Papua New Guinea women demand end to domestic violence after death of 19-year-old mother Jenelyn Kennedy,’ dated 4 July 2020.[58]

   [58]   Dept File No [deleted]

   ·ABC News, ‘Domestic violence back in spotlight in Papua New Guinea after two boys’ dated 28 April 2021.

   ·PNG Primary School Age 2022[59]

   [59]   Dept File No [deleted]

   ·Statement from [Ms B] dated 18 April 2023.[60]

   [60]   AAT File No2207146 Doc ID:10976422

   ·Statement of [the applicant] dated 20 April 2023.[61]

   [61]   ibid

   ·DFAT Report PNG September 2022. [62]

   [62]   ibid

   ·PNG Demographic and Health Survey 2016-18.[63]

   [63]   ibid

   ·UNICEF ‘Strengthening Mental Health and Psychological Support Systems and Services for Children in East Asia and Pacific Region,’ PNG Country Report 2022.[64] 

   [64]   ibid

   ·Letter form [a doctor] of [named organisation] dated 20 January 2022.[65]

   [65]   ibid

   ·[Health clinic], Dr [A] dated 22 December 2022.[66]

   [66]   ibid

   ·Letter [from] Office of Director of Crimes, PNG dated [April] 2013.[67]

   [67]   ibid

   ·Text messages 13 February 2023.[68]

   [68]   ibid

   ·Oxfam, Understanding Gender Based and Sorcery Related Violence in Papua New Guinea 2013 -2016.[69] 

   [69]   ibid

   ·Lowy Institute, ‘World Mental Health Day: reflections from Papua New Guinea’ by Kylie Mc Kenna & Peter Nasale, 12 October 2022.[70]

   [70]   ibid

   ·Human Rights Watch – Bashed Up Family Violence in PNG 2015.[71]  

   [71]   ibid

   ·[Health clinic] letter of Support by [Ms A] dated 25 January 2023.[72]

   [72]   ibid

   ·PlosOne, Article, May 15, 2020.[73]

   [73]  AAT File No2207146 Doc ID: 10994968

   ·Applicant’s submissions, Letter by Carina Ford dated 26 April 2023.[74]

   [74]  ibid

   ·BMC, ‘Investigating health service availability and readiness for antenatal testing and treatment for HIV and syphilis in Papua New Guinea’ by Olga PM Saweri, Neha Batura, Justin Pulford, M. Mahmud Khan, Xiaohui Hou, William S Poma, Andrew J Vallely and Virginia Wiseman 2022.

   ·PNG Hepatitis B free in PNG.[75]

   ·DovePress, Impact of Stigma on People Living with Chronic Hepatitis B by  Jayne Smith-Palmer, Karin Cerri, Urbano Sbarigia, Eric KH Chan, Richard F Pollock , William J Valentine, Kristien Bonroy 2022[76]

   ·Applicant’s Chronology.[77]

   ·[Cervical] Screening Report dated 22 August 2022.[78] 

   ·Report [Health service] dated 17 September 2020.[79]

   ·[Health clinic] Report dated 15 August 2022.[80]

   ·Report [Health service] Dr [A] dated 12 October 2022.[81]

   ·Human Rights Watch. ‘Papua New Guinea Unprepared for Covid 19 Surge’ 16 March 2021. 

   ·Lowy Institute, The Health Challenge in PNG is far Greater than Covid 19 alone’ by Ishani Kaluthotage 13 May 2020.[82]  

   [75]   ibid

   [76]   ibid

   [77]   ibid

   [78]   AAT File No2207146 Doc ID: 11054696

   [79] ibid

   [80] ibid

   [81] ibid

   [82] ibid

CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

1. The issue in this case is if the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations as outlined in s36(2)(a) or s36(2)(aa). For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

COUNTRY INFORMATION

1. In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.84 made under s 499 of the Act, the Tribunal also had regard to the country information assessments prepared by DFAT. The Tribunal has referred to the DFAT report on Papua New Guinea (PNG) dated 6 September 2022.  (DFAT Report).  In particular, the Tribunal has taken into consideration those parts of the DFAT Report relevant to the applicant’s claims, as reproduced in Attachment ‘A’ to this decision.

Credibility

1. When assessing claims, the Tribunal must make findings of fact in relation to the claims. In doing so, the Tribunal is mindful of the difficulties faced by refugee applicants, including issues related to the use of interpreters, nervousness and anxiety in a Tribunal environment, and stress caused by separation from home and family. There may also be memory issues resulting from the lapse of time, and cultural issues which affect how an applicant will answer questions. The benefit of the doubt should be given to an applicant who is generally credible but unable to substantiate all his or her claims. All this is considered in these findings.

2. The mere fact that a person claims fear of persecution for a reason does not establish either the genuineness of the asserted fear or that it is ‘well-founded’, or that it is for the reason claimed. Similarly, the fact that an applicant claims to face a real risk of significant harm does not establish that such a risk exists, or that the harm feared amounts to ‘significant harm’. It remains for the applicant to satisfy the Tribunal that all the statutory elements are made out. A decision-maker is not required to make the applicant’s case for him or her. It is the responsibility of the applicant to specify all particulars of the claim to be a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations and to provide enough evidence to establish the claim. The Tribunal does not have any responsibility or obligation to specify, or assist in specifying any particulars of the claim, or to establish or assist in establishing the claim[83]. Nor is the Tribunal required to accept uncritically all the allegations made by an applicant.[84]

   [83]   Section 5AAA of the Act.

   [84]  MIEA v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559 at 596; Nagalingam v MILGEA (1992) 38 FCR 191; Prasad v MIEA (1985) 6 FCR 155 at 169-70.

3. A reasonable approach needs to be adopted when making a finding in relation to an applicant’s credibility.[85] Care must be taken not to exclude from consideration the totality of some evidence where a portion of it could reasonably have been accepted. If the applicant’s account appears credible, he or she should, unless there are good reasons to the contrary, be given the benefit of the doubt.[86] However, such a benefit should only be given when all available evidence has been obtained and checked and when the examiner is satisfied as to the applicant’s general credibility. The applicant’s statements must be coherent and plausible and must not run counter to generally known facts.

   [85]   Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and McIllhatton v Guo Wei Rong and Pan Run Juan (1996) 40 ALD 445 per Foster J at p482.

   [86]   The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, Geneva, 1992 at para 196.

4. In this case, the applicant’s personal and cultural background needs to be considered in relation to her ability to engage in the legal process and to provide evidence to the Tribunal. Her cultural background from the Highlands of PNG is one of violence which can be triggered for a variety of reasons including domestic relations and accusations of sorcery and witchcraft.[87] As a result, the applicant’s evidence needs to be considered in light of her cultural background and norms. 

Accepted facts

[87]  DFAT Report at p.12

1. Based on the applicant’s and [Ms A]’s oral evidence to the Tribunal, together with the statements provided by [Ms B] and [Ms A] the Tribunal accepts and finds that:

   (a)the applicant was born in [Jiwaka] Province, PNG, on [date] and is a PNG citizen.

   (b)the applicant is a Christian.

   (c)the applicant’s father died in 2008 but her mother remains living in PNG. Both her mother and father worked as [Occupation 1]. 

   (d)the applicant has [brothers][88] and one sister, all of whom continue to live in PNG.[89]

   (e)the applicant attended school in PNG having attended [Primary] School and [School 2] in Sandaun Province and [School 1] in the Easter Highlands Province.[90]

   (f)the applicant then attended [University 1] and completed a Bachelor [degree] in 2009.[91]

   (g)the applicant completed a [course] in 2015 at [School 3] in Gabtu, PNG.[92]

   (h)the applicant entered a relationship with [Mr A] in or about 2007 while studying at the [University 1]. [Mr A] was born in Morobe Province but raised in Goroka.

   (i)the applicant became pregnant and had a child to [Mr A] in 2007.  

Delay

[88]   Application for a protection visa dated 16 January 2017 at [42]; [file number]

[89]  Applicants Statutory Declaration dated 30 November 2017; [file number]

[90]   High School Certificate, [High School 1] dated [year]; [file number]

[91]  [University 1], Bachelor [degree] dated [June] 2010; [file number]

[92]  Certificate [School 3] dated [July] 2015; [file number]

1. Delay in seeking a protection visa can support an adverse credibility finding as well as a finding that the applicant does not have a well-founded fear of harm.[93] Even a three-month delay in lodging a protection visa application has been held to be a legitimate matter to be considered when assessing the genuineness or depth of an applicant’s fear of persecution.[94]

   [93]   Zhang v RRT & Anor [1997] FCA 423; Kavan v MIMA [2000] FCA 370.

   [94]   Subramanium v MIMA (1998) VG310 of 1997.

2. The applicant’s evidence was that she was invited to travel to Australia in [2014]. Her evidence was that she travelled to Australia for her mental health because she wanted to get away from everything in PNG.[95] Her evidence was that at the time she was not aware that she could apply for protection visa. Nevertheless, her evidence was that even if she had known that she could apply for a protection visa at that time, she would have still returned to PNG because she was hopeful that her circumstances would improve. The applicant’s evidence was that upon her return to PNG her situation with [Mr A] did not improve. As a result, she was forced to relocate to Port Moresby in December 2014, where she worked as [Occupation 1]for two years. The applicant’s evidence was that she hid in Port Moresby, rarely leaving home and keeping to herself. It was only upon being discovered by [Mr A]’s cousin and upon her receiving threatening text messages from [Mr A] that she believed that she had no alternative but seek protection in Australia.[96]  

   [95]   Applicant’s submissions, letter by Carina Ford dated 20 April 2023 at p.3; Applicant’s statement dated 18 April 2023.AAt file No 2207146 Doc ID:10976422

   [96]   ibid

3. In circumstances where the applicant is an educated person and where she was required to make application for a tourist visa, the Tribunal does not accept that she was not aware that she could make an application for a protection visa at the time of her first visit to Australia. Nevertheless, in circumstances where the applicant claims she is a victim of domestic violence, it is not an unreasonable for her to have returned to PNG believing that circumstances between her and her partner her would improve. The applicant’s evidence was that it was only upon receiving [Mr A]’s threatening text messages in Port Moresby that she concluded she had no other alternative but to seek protection in Australia.  Based on the applicant own evidence that Tribunal accepts that she believed that the situation between her and [Mr A] would improve at the time of her visit to Australia in 2014. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that there has been no delay in the applicant making her application for protection visa.

Applicant’s refugee claim

Relevant grounds

1. The applicant claims that she has a well-founded fear of persecution if she is returned to PNG within the scope of 5J(1) of the Act as a member of a particular social group (PSG), that is, as a:

   (a)female who has experienced family violence in PNG.

   (b)female who has suffered mental health issues in PNG; and

   (c)female who has experienced Family violence in PNG and suffered from mental health issues in PNG.

2. Section 5L of the Act[97] states:

   [97]  In Applicant A (1997) 190 CLR 225 re: Dawson J.

   For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person is to be treated as a member of a particular social group (other than the person’s family) if:

   (a) a characteristic is shared by each member of the group; and

   (b) the person shares, or is perceived as sharing, the characteristic; and

   (c) any of the following apply:

   (i) the characteristic is an innate or immutable characteristic.

   (ii) the characteristic is so fundamental to a member‘s identity or conscience, the member should not be forced to renounce it;

(iii) the characteristic distinguishes the group from society; and

(d) the characteristic is not a fear of persecution.

1. In MIMA v Khawar (2002) 210 CLR [98] the High Court, when considering the refugee convention, found that it would be open for the Tribunal to declare that 'women in Pakistan' meets the description of PSG. On the issue of such a large group His Honour Chief Justice Gleeson stated that:[99]

   'The size of the group does not necessarily stand in the way ... There are instances where the victims of persecution in a country have been a majority. It is power, not number, that creates the conditions in which persecution may occur.'

   [98] MIMA v Khawar (2002) 210 CLR 1

   [99] MIMA v Khawar (2002) 210 CLR 1 at [33]

2. In this case the applicant claims that being a female who has experienced domestic violence in PNG and/or a female who has suffered mental health issues in PNG are characteristics that are so fundamental to her identity or conscience that she should not be forced to renounce it. In addition, the applicant’s claims that they are characteristics that distinguishes the group from the rest of society.  For the reason detailed in these reasons the Tribunal accepts she is a victim of family violence in PNG and that she suffers from a mental health condition as claimed. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepts that the applicant is a member of a PSG pursuant to s 5L as claimed and as such accepts her claim falls within the scope of s 5J(1)(a) of the Act.

Applicant’s well-founded fear

1. In Chan v MIEA[100] the Court held that ‘well-founded fear’ involves both a subjective and objective element. That is, the definition will be satisfied if an applicant can show genuine fear founded upon a ‘real chance’ of persecution. Dawson J noted that the phrase ‘well-founded fear of being persecuted...’ contains both a subjective and an objective requirement. That is, there must be a state of mind (fear of being persecuted) and a basis (well-founded) for that fear.[101] The subjective element of ‘well-founded fear’ concerns the state of mind of the applicant. That is, whether an applicant has a genuine fear is a question of fact.

   [100] (1989) 169 CLR 379 at 396.

   [101]  Chan v MIEA (1989) 169 CLR 379 at 396. See also MIEA v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259 at 263 per Brennan CJ, Toohey, McHugh and Gummow JJ.

2. However, to hold a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ on an objective basis, the applicant’s claim must be more than merely plausible or credible. In Chan v MIEA, Dawson J stated:[102]

   “Well-founded” must mean something more than plausible, for an applicant may have a plausible belief which may be demonstrated, upon facts unknown to him or her, to have no foundation.’

   [102]  Chan v MIEA (1989) 169 CLR 379 per Dawson J at p.397.

1. In MIEA v Guo, the Court stated that:[103]

   ‘Conjecture or surmise has no part to play in determining whether a fear is well‑founded. A fear is ‘well-founded’ when there is a real substantial basis for it. As Chan shows, a substantial basis for a fear may exist even though there is far less than a 50 per cent chance that the object of the fear will eventuate. But no fear can be well-founded for the purpose of the Convention unless the evidence indicates a real ground for believing that the applicant for refugee status is at risk of persecution. A fear of persecution is not well-founded if it is merely assumed or if it is mere speculation.’

   [103]  MIEA v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559 at 572; cf MIEA v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259 at 293.

2. The applicant claims that, in the event she is returned to PNG, there is a real chance she will suffer serious harm as a woman in PNG and as a victim of domestic violence.  For the reasons expressed below, the Tribunal accepts that the applicant holds a subjective and an objective fear of persecution for a reason mentioned in s 5J(1)(a) of the Act as claimed. 

Applicant as a victim of domestic violence.

1. The applicant states that there is a real chance she will be seriously harmed by her partner [Mr A] if she is returned to PNG.  The applicant’s evidence was that she met [Mr A] while at university. She became pregnant and had a son to [Mr A] known to her as [name]. The applicant’s evidence was that after five days [Mr A]’s family came to the hospital and took her son away.[104] The applicant claims that in PNG the man controls the household. As a result, [Mr A]’s family took the child from her. The applicant’s evidence was that [Mr A] prevented her from seeing her son. As a result, she has not seen her son since he was taken and does not know what has happened to him.[105] 

   [104]  Op Cit at [28]

   [105]  Op Cit at [28]

2. The applicant claims that her partner [Mr A] became very violent towards her and would sexually and physically abuse her. The applicant’s evidence was that when she was physically harmed by [Mr A], he prevented her from seeking medical help, as a result she did not have any medical records evidencing the abuse she suffered in PNG. The statement of [Ms A] dated 1 September 2017 of [Health clinic] reported that the applicant had been referred to the counselling service to manage symptoms of anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Consistent with the applicant’s evidence to the Tribunal, [Ms A] stated both orally to the Tribunal and in her report that the applicant had described to her a long history of extreme domestic violence in PNG which included physical, sexual, emotional, financial, and verbal abuse which commenced at the time the applicant was pregnant in 2007.

3. The statement of [Ms B] dated 18 April 2023 states that the applicant met [Mr A] while studying at university and that she fell pregnant to him. [Ms B] states that while [Mr A] was initially fair and decent, he became possessive and controlling. Her evidence was that [Mr A] became violent towards the applicant, particularly when he had consumed alcohol. Her evidence was that the applicant endured enormous trauma and distress both physically and mentally because of the abuse inflicted by [Mr A].

4. The country information[106] reports violence against women is very common with almost all women and girls being subjected to violence at some point during their lives. It’s reported[107] that a woman is beaten every 30 seconds in PNG with more than 1.5 million people experiencing gender-based violence each year. In March 2019, more than 200 domestic violence and sexual violence cases were reported in Lae and Port Moresby, with 23 murders alone being attributed to domestic violence.[108] The DFAT report[109] notes that the PNG Demographic Health Survey of 2016-2018 found that 58 percent of women aged 15 to 49 had experienced physical violence and 28 percent had experienced sexual violence. In addition, its reported that 18 percent of women had experienced violence during pregnancy. 

   [106] DFAT report at p.15

   [107] Human Rights Watch, ‘Women in Papua New Guinea are Suffering an Epidemic of Violence – The Government must Act.’ by Stephine McLennan 30 September 2021 DFAT Report at p.15.

   [108] Human Rights Watch, ‘World Report 2020 - Papua New Guinea events of 2019’. DFAT Report at p.15

5. The DFAT Report[110] states that women across PNG face a high risk of societal discrimination due to long standing traditional values and gender roles which restrict their ability to fully participate in the community and workforce. It’s reported that women face a high risk of gender-based violence regardless of their social status and that woman, from the Highland provinces, such as the applicant, are at particular risk.[111]

   [110] ibid

   [111] DFAT Report at p.15-16

6. It’s reported that it is unlikely women who are subjected to gender violence will be able to access adequate police protection or support services. In May 2021 a special parliamentary committee on gender-based violence (‘the committee’) found that there was a lack of support from the government to adequately respond to the number of cases of violence against women and girls in PNG.[112] The committee reported that in 2020 15,444 cases of domestic violence were reported but only 250 people were prosecuted and only 100 convicted.[113] It’s reported[114] that the PNG police and prosecution rarely pursue criminal charges against perpetrators of family violence even in the most serious of cases. Its reported[115] that the PNG police commissioner informed the committee that the PNG police did not have the resources to keep women and children safe. In Mr Hagen, on 3 September 2021, three men (including the victim’s husband) were released from prison after being accused of murdering a 31-year-old woman, Imelda Tupi Timandra. The charges were dismissed by the magistrate based on a lack of evidence despite the police having found the victim’s body wrapped in a tarpaulin in the back of the husband’s vehicle at a police checkpoint and the husband allegedly having made a confession to police.[116]

   [112] Human Rights Watch, ‘Women in Papua New Guinea are Suffering an Epidemic of Violence – The Government must Act.’ by Stephine McLennan 30 September 2021 ibid

   [114] DFAT Report at p.16

   [115] Human Rights Watch, ‘Women in Papua New Guinea are Suffering an Epidemic of Violence – The Government must Act.’ by Stephine McLennan 30 September 2021 ibid; DFAT Report at p.16

In September 2013 the PNG parliament passed the family protection Act (2013) which makes provision of interim protection order and long-term protection orders.[117] However, the country information reports that implementation of the Act remains weak. The number of protection orders ordered remain low and the PNG police lack the inclination and resources to enforce the orders.[118] 

[117] DFAT Report at p.16

[118] ibid

Finally, it’s reported[119] that there is a lack of sufficient resources for victims of family-based violence in PNG.  There are only 22 Family Support Centres in PNG (one for each province). These centres are attached to the general hospital to provide health services to gender-based violence survivors. However, they are poorly resourced with only one or two staff, primarily nurses or social workers rather than a doctor.[120] The centres charge around 20 PGK (approximately AUD$8.00) for their services which is then used for family compensation rather than police investigation.[121] Any compensation is usually paid to the victim’s family and not the survivor herself.[122]

[119] DFAT Report at p.17

[120] ibid

[121] ibid

[122] ibid

The country information reports that the lack of maternity health services for pregnant women, entrenched gender inequality, lack of access to family planning and poor state rural health services means that PNG women often die because of complications from childbirth.[123] One in nineteen women in PNG die from childbirth.[124] The Development Policy Centre reports[125] that compared to Australia, mothers in PNG are 35 times more likely to die during pregnancy and their newborns are 10 times more likely to die during the first month of life. Men, who control the household decision making are often not engaged in their partner’s pregnancy.[126] As a result, the mothers do not receive the proper care and attention they require during their pregnancy and at the time of giving birth.[127]  The applicant’s evidence was that after the birth of her child she became very sick and had difficulty coping. Her evidence was that five days after giving birth [Mr A]’s family took her baby from her. Her evidence was that she has not been told what happened to him and that she has been prevented from seeing him since he was taken for her.

[123] The Canberra Times, ‘The reality of childbirth in PNG’ 8 May 2014 by Emma Macdonald and Karleen Minney; http”// ibid

[125] Development Policy Centre ‘My Mother was lucky to survive giving birth to me in Papua New Guinea’ by Oilve Oa 19 June 2018; World Health Organisation ‘‘It takes a village’ to reduce maternal and newborn mortality in Papua New Guinea’ 19 October 2021 ibid

Based on the applicant’s evidence to the Tribunal and the evidence of [Ms A] and [Ms B], the Tribunal accepts that the applicant was in a relationship with [Mr A] and that she has a child known to her as [name] as claimed. In addition, the Tribunal accepts the applicant’s evidence that her baby was removed from her by her partner’s family soon after he was born, and she has not had any contact with him since. 

The applicant claims that because of the abuse she suffered by [Mr A] she contracted hepatitis B. The [Dr A] report[128] confirms that the applicant tested positive for hepatitis B. As a result, the Tribunal accepts and finds that the applicant has hepatitis B as claimed. Hepatitis B can be transmitted in several ways including by sexual intercourse.[129] The country information[130] reports that approximately 8 percent of the PNG population has chronic hepatitis B. The applicant’s evidence was that while she was in Morobe province in in 2012 and 2013 she became very ill suffering pain in her stomach and painful discharge due to the sexual abuse she had suffered. The applicant’s symptoms are consistent with the effects of hepatitis B.[131] The applicant’s evidence was that because of her illness she was sent to Jiwaka province to be with her family. Based on the applicant’s evidence and the evidence of [Ms. A] and [Ms B] the Tribunal accepts that the applicant was sexually and physically abused as claimed.  As a result, on the applicant’s evidence and the available country information the Tribunal accepts that she suffers hepatitis B and that she contracted the illness as a result of being sexually abused by [Mr A] as claimed.

[128] Dr [A] of [Health clinic] GP dated 28 July 2017; AAT file No 2207146 Doc ID10976422

[129] Burnet National library of Medicine ‘Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Seroprevalence Among Children in Papua New Guinea, 2012-2013’ 4 March 2015 by Russel Kitau, Siddhartha Sankar Datta,^* Minal K. Patel, Karen Hennessey, Kathleen Wannemuehler, Gerard Sui, and William Lagani; Burnet >

The applicant claims that of she is returned to PNG she will be physically and sexually assaulted. The applicant’s evidence was when [Mr A]’s cousin noticed her at the market in [a nearby town] while she was working at the [remote workplace] she feared that [Mr A] would come for her. As a result, she went to Port Moresby and remained there until October 2016 when she was informed that [Mr A] had discovered where she was. The applicant claims that she received threatening text messages from [Mr A] while she was in Port Moresby and produced to the Tribunal the text messages she received after she arrived in Australia. The applicant claims that having been discovered in Port Moresby there is no place in the country that she can reallocate to.