2317003 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Vanuatu, sought a protection visa, claiming to have suffered family violence and serious injury at the hands of his family members in his home country. He also asserted that local authorities would not address such domestic violence and that he would be easily found if he attempted to relocate within Vanuatu. The case was heard by the Tribunal, presided over by Member Paul Windsor.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, by having a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the prescribed reasons, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa), whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, upon removal to Vanuatu, he faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's claims against the relevant provisions of the Act, including the definitions of refugee, well-founded fear of persecution, and significant harm, and to consider applicable Ministerial Directions and guidelines.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant's claims were vague, lacking in specific detail, and contained contradictions, which failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. It was noted that the onus rests on the applicant to particularise and substantiate their claims, and the Tribunal is not obliged to construct the case for them. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not satisfied the statutory elements required for the grant of a protection visa, particularly in relation to the nature and basis of the alleged harm and the lack of effective protection measures or reasonable relocation options within Vanuatu.

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