2217969 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the protection visa applications of four individuals from Jordan. The primary applicant claimed he feared persecution in Jordan due to his opposition to extremist politics, and that while the Jordanian government would not be the persecutor, it would be unable to protect him from harm by others. The other applicants were his spouse and their two Australian-born children.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires the applicant to be a refugee, or under section 36(2)(aa), which requires the Minister to be satisfied that Australia has protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm upon removal to a receiving country. The Tribunal was also required to consider the definition of "refugee" and "significant harm" as defined in the Act, and to take into account relevant guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal reasoned that the onus was on the applicants to provide sufficient particulars and evidence to establish their claims, and that it was not obligated to assist in specifying or establishing these claims. After considering the available evidence, including country information regarding the defence and surveillance against terrorist and criminal threats in Jordan, and noting that the applicants had not provided sufficient information to substantiate their claims of a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Australia had protection obligations towards any of the applicants.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants protection visas, as they failed to satisfy the criteria under either section 36(2)(a) or 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958.