2313757 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Vanuatu, sought a protection visa in Australia. The dispute concerned the applicant's claims of gender-based violence, sexual slavery, and fear of killing, which she alleged would befall her if she returned to Vanuatu. The decision under review was made by the Refugee Tribunal, presided over by Christine Cody.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether she had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a convention reason or a real risk of significant harm amounting to complementary protection. This required the Tribunal to assess the genuineness and well-foundedness of her asserted fears and to determine if Australia owed her protection obligations. A secondary issue arose from the applicant's failure to attend her scheduled hearing, requiring the Tribunal to consider its ability to make a decision without her appearance.

The Tribunal reasoned that an applicant bears the onus of satisfying the statutory elements for a protection visa, including providing sufficient evidence to establish their claims. The Tribunal is not obligated to make or assist in making the applicant's case. Citing *BZADA v MIC and RRT* [2013] FCA 1062, the Tribunal noted that a failure to attend a hearing can prevent the necessary level of satisfaction from being reached, as it impedes the ability to test and examine claims. In this instance, the applicant did not attend her hearing despite receiving proper notification and reminders. Consequently, the Tribunal was unable to test or examine her claims and, pursuant to s 426A of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), proceeded to make a decision on the review without further action to enable her appearance. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.