2318986 (Refugee)

Case [2024] AATA 1566


2318986 (Refugee) [2024] AATA 1566 (7 February 2024)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  2318986

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                   Tonga

MEMBER:David James

DATE:7 February 2024

PLACE OF DECISION:  Brisbane

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.

Statement made on 07 February 2024 at 9:33am

CATCHWORDS

REFUGEE – protection visa – Tonga – economic conditions – employment – volcanic eruption – exclusion from the community – family support – accommodation – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION

Migration Act 1958, ss 5(1), 5AAA, 5H, 5J – 5LA, 36, 65, 424, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, Schedule 2

CASES

Abebe v The Commonwealth of Australia (1999) 197 CLR 510
ABT16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2019] FCA 836
Anadaraj Subramaniam v MIMA (1998) VG310 of 1997
AVQ15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 133
Chan Yee Kin v MIEA (1989) 169 CLR 379
Chand v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs [1997] FCA 1198
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118
Kopalapillai v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 86 FCR 547
MIAC v SZQRB (2013) 210 FCR 505
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and McIllhatton v Guo Wei Rong and Pan Run Juan (1996) 40 ALD 445
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Guo (1997) 191 CLR 559
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang & Ors (1996) 185 CLR 259
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Rajalingam (1999) 93 FCR 220
Prasad v MIEA (1985) 6 FCR 155
Randhawa v MILGEA (1994) 52 FCR 437
Selvadurai v MIEA & Anor (1994) 34 ALD 347
SZLVZ v MIAC [2008] FCA 1816
SZRQA v MIBP [2013] FCA 962       

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 8 November 2023 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 the Kingdom of Tonga (Tonga), applied for the visa on 2 October 2023. The delegate refused to grant the visa on the basis that the delegate was not satisfied that the applicant was a refugee as defined by s 5H of the Act, and was therefore not satisfied that the applicant was a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations as outlined in s 36(2)(a) of the Act. The delegate was also not satisfied that there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant being removed to Tonga, there is a real risk they will suffer significant harm as defined in s…

Continue reading 2318986 (Refugee)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
2318986 (Refugee) [2024] AATA 1566
Case
[2024] AATA 1566
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, a national of Tonga, sought review of the Tribunal's decision to affirm the refusal of a protection visa. The applicant's claims for protection were based on alleged significant economic downturn and environmental impacts from a volcanic eruption in Tonga, leading to reduced job opportunities and a decline in the standard of living. The applicant contended that upon return to Tonga, he would face economic hardship, be unable to support himself, and potentially be harmed by fellow villagers. He also asserted that Tongan authorities could not provide protection and that relocation within Tonga would not improve his circumstances.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1) of the Migration Act 1958, and if there was a real chance of such persecution upon return to Tonga. Alternatively, the court had to consider whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Tonga, the applicant faced a real risk of suffering significant harm as defined in section 36(2A) of the Act.

The Tribunal considered documentary evidence, including the applicant's visa application and passport details. It noted that the applicant had arrived in Australia under the Seasonal Worker Programme. The Tribunal applied the legal principles concerning the assessment of a "real risk" of significant harm, which it equated to the "real chance" test for well-founded fear. It also had regard to relevant Ministerial Directions, the Refugee Law Guidelines, Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information assessments. Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a refugee or for complementary protection.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the Act. Consequently, it was not necessary to assess whether the applicant had a right to enter and reside in a country other than Tonga under section 36(3).

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

The issues in this review are whether the applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five reasons set out in s 5J(1) of the Act, and there is a real chance that, if the applicant was returned to Tonga, they would be persecuted for one of those reasons and, if not, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed from Australia to Tonga, there is a real risk that the applicant will suffer significant harm as defined in s 36(2A) of the Act.Documentary evidence before the Tribunal The Tribunal has before it documents submitted by the applicant to the Department and the Tribunal relating to the applicant’s claims for protection, which includes (but is not limited to) the following documents, considered by the Tribunal:·The applicant’s protection visa application lodged on 2 October 2023 and the annexed copy of the applicant’s Tongan passport’s bio data page;·The applicant’s application for review of 22 November 2023; and·The administrative and movement records of the Department relating to the applicant.Claims for protection In his protection visa application, the applicant stated that he had originally arrived in Australia on a work visa from the Kingdom of Tonga. He stated that he was writing to formally request consideration for a protection visa due to the significant and severe changes in circumstances that had affected the living conditions in his homeland. The applicant made the following claims for protection in his application (as summarised below) that:·He left Tonga through the Seasonal Worker Programme (SWP) to work in Australia;·There has been a significant economic downturn in Tonga with decreased job opportunities and a subsequent decline in the standard of living for Tongans. This, coupled with the devastating volcanic eruption environmental impacts, has put an immense strain on the nation’s infrastructure, which has further amplified the hardships faced by its people;·In discussions with his family about the deteriorating situation in Tonga, he thinks he will face a great risk to his well-being, experience economic hardship, and find it extremely difficult to financially support himself if he returns to Tonga, due to the combined effects of economic instability, reduced access to resources, and the environmental impacts of the volcanic eruption;·He thinks he will be harmed by fellow villagers in his community who will not be supportive of him not being able to support himself; ·He did not try to relocate in Tonga because he was able to come to Australia through the SWP;·He does not believe the Tongan authorities can protect him because they are not able to offer the applicant any financial assistance; and·He does not believe that relocating to another part of Tonga will help his circumstances.Department interview The applicant was not offered an interview by the Department.Invitation to attend a hearing On 15 December 2023, the Tribunal invited the applicant to attend a review hearing at the Brisbane Registry on 6 February 2024 at 9:30 am. This correspondence advised the applicant that the Tribunal had considered all the material before it relating to their application, but that it was unable to make a favourable decision on that information alone. The Tribunal invited the applicant to give oral evidence and present arguments at a hearing. The invitation stated that if the applicant did not attend the hearing, the Tribunal may make a decision on the case without further notice.

Decision

Reasons for decision

As the Tribunal has found that the applicant does not meet the refugee and complimentary criteria and does not satisfy the criteria in s 36(2) of the Act, the Tribunal has not found it necessary to assess s 36(3) of the Act, as to whether the applicant has a right to enter and reside in a country other than Tonga.DECISION The Tribunal affirms the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.David JamesSenior MemberATTACHMENT - Extract from Migration Act 19585 (1) Interpretation…cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment means an act or omission by which:(a) severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person; or(b) pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person so long as, in all the circumstances, the act or omission could reasonably be regarded as cruel or inhuman in nature;but does not include an act or omission:(c) that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or(d) arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.…degrading treatment or punishment means an act or omission that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation which is unreasonable, but does not include an act or omission:(a) that is not inconsistent with Article 7 of the Covenant; or(b) that causes, and is intended to cause, extreme humiliation arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.…torture means an act or omission by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person:(a) for the purpose of obtaining from the person or from a third person information or a confession; or(b) for the purpose of punishing the person for an act which that person or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed; or(c) for the purpose of intimidating or coercing the person or a third person; or(d) for a purpose related to a purpose mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or (c); or(e) for any reason based on discrimination that is inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant;but does not include an act or omission arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions that are not inconsistent with the Articles of the Covenant.…receiving country, in relation to a non-citizen, means:(a) a country of which the non-citizen is a national, to be determined solely by reference to the law of the relevant country; or(b) if the non-citizen has no country of nationality—a country of his or her former habitual residence, regardless of whether it would be possible to return the non-citizen to the country.…5H Meaning of refugee(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person in Australia, the person is a refugee if the person is:(a) in a case where the person has a nationality – is outside the country of his or her nationality and, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country; or(b) in a case where the person does not have a nationality – is outside the country of his or her former habitual residence and owing to a well-founded fear of persecution, is unable or unwilling to return to it.Note: For the meaning of well-founded fear of persecution, see section 5J.…5J Meaning of well-founded fear of persecution(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, the person has a well-founded fear of persecution if:(a) the person fears being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion; and(b) there is a real chance that, if the person returned to the receiving country, the person would be persecuted for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (a); and(c) the real chance of persecution relates to all areas of a receiving country.Note: For membership of a particular social group, see sections 5K and 5L.(2)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country.Note: For effective protection measures, see section 5LA.(3)A person does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if the person could take reasonable steps to modify his or her behaviour so as to avoid a real chance of persecution in a receiving country, other than a modification that would:(a) conflict with a characteristic that is fundamental to the person’s identity or conscience; or(b) conceal an innate or immutable characteristic of the person; or(c) without limiting paragraph (a) or (b), require the person to do any of the following:(i)alter his or her religious beliefs, including by renouncing a religious conversion, or conceal his or her true religious beliefs, or cease to be involved in the practice of his or her faith;(ii)conceal his or her true race, ethnicity, nationality or country of origin;(iii)alter his or her political beliefs or conceal his or her true political beliefs;(iv)conceal a physical, psychological or intellectual disability;(v)enter into or remain in a marriage to which that person is opposed, or accept the forced marriage of a child;(vi)alter his or her sexual orientation or gender identity or conceal his or her true sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status.(4)If a person fears persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a):(a) that reason must be the essential and significant reason, or those reasons must be the essential and significant reasons, for the persecution; and(b) the persecution must involve serious harm to the person; and(c) the persecution must involve systematic and discriminatory conduct.(5)Without limiting what is serious harm for the purposes of paragraph (4)(b), the following are instances of serious harm for the purposes of that paragraph:(a) a threat to the person’s life or liberty;(b) significant physical harassment of the person;(c) significant physical ill‑treatment of the person;(d) significant economic hardship that threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;(e) denial of access to basic services, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist;(f) denial of capacity to earn a livelihood of any kind, where the denial threatens the person’s capacity to subsist.(6)In determining whether the person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for one or more of the reasons mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), any conduct engaged in by the person in Australia is to be disregarded unless the person satisfies the Minister that the person engaged in the conduct otherwise than for the purpose of strengthening the person’s claim to be a refugee.5K Membership of a particular social group consisting of familyFor the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person (the first person), in determining whether the first person has a well‑founded fear of persecution for the reason of membership of a particular social group that consists of the first person’s family:(a) disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced, where the reason for the fear or persecution is not a reason mentioned in paragraph 5J(1)(a); and(b) disregard any fear of persecution, or any persecution, that:(i)the first person has ever experienced; or(ii)any other member or former member (whether alive or dead) of the family has ever experienced;where it is reasonable to conclude that the fear or persecution would not exist if it were assumed that the fear or persecution mentioned in paragraph (a) had never existed.Note: Section 5G may be relevant for determining family relationships for the purposes of this section.5L Membership of a particular social group other than familyFor 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.5LA Effective protection measures(1)For the purposes of the application of this Act and the regulations to a particular person, effective protection measures are available to the person in a receiving country if:(a) protection against persecution could be provided to the person by:(i)the relevant State; or(ii)a party or organisation, including an international organisation, that controls the relevant State or a substantial part of the territory of the relevant State; and(b) the relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (a) is willing and able to offer such protection.(2)A relevant State, party or organisation mentioned in paragraph (1)(a) is taken to be able to offer protection against persecution to a person if:(a) the person can access the protection; and(b) the protection is durable; and(c) in the case of protection provided by the relevant State—the protection consists of an appropriate criminal law, a reasonably effective police force and an impartial judicial system.…36 Protection visas – criteria provided for by this Act…(2)A criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is:(a) a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the person is a refugee; or(aa) a non-citizen in Australia (other than a non-citizen mentioned in paragraph (a)) 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 the non-citizen being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that the non-citizen will suffer significant harm; or(b) a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:(i)is mentioned in paragraph (a); and(ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant; or(c) a non-citizen in Australia who is a member of the same family unit as a non-citizen who:(i)is mentioned in paragraph (aa); and(ii)holds a protection visa of the same class as that applied for by the applicant.(2A)A non‑citizen will suffer significant harm if:(a) the non‑citizen will be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life; or(b) the death penalty will be carried out on the non‑citizen; or(c) the non‑citizen will be subjected to torture; or(d) the non‑citizen will be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment; or(e) the non‑citizen will be subjected to degrading treatment or punishment.(2B)However, there is taken not to be a real risk that a non‑citizen will suffer significant harm in a country if the Minister is satisfied that:(a) it would be reasonable for the non‑citizen to relocate to an area of the country where there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or(b) the non‑citizen could obtain, from an authority of the country, protection such that there would not be a real risk that the non‑citizen will suffer significant harm; or(c) the real risk is one faced by the population of the country generally and is not faced by the non‑citizen personally.…

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

[Section 36(2)(aa) refers to a ‘real risk’ of an applicant suffering significant harm. The ‘real risk’ test imposes the same standard as the ‘real chance’ test applicable to the assessment of ‘well-founded fear’ in the Refugee Convention definition: MIAC v SZQRB (2013) 210 FCR 505.Mandatory considerations 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 (the Department), and country information assessments prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCEIssues The issues in this review are whether the applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five reasons set out in s 5J(1) of the Act, and there is a real chance that, if the applicant was returned to Tonga, they would be persecuted for one of those reasons and, if not, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed from Australia to Tonga, there is a real risk that the applicant will suffer significant harm as defined in s 36(2A) of the Act.Documentary evidence before the Tribunal The Tribunal has before it documents submitted by the applicant to the Department and the Tribunal relating to the applicant’s claims for protection, which includes (but is not limited to) the following documents, considered by the Tribunal:·The applicant’s protection visa application lodged on 2 October 2023 and the annexed copy of the applicant’s Tongan passport’s bio data page;·The applicant’s application for review of 22 November 2023; and·The administrative and movement records of the Department relating to the applicant.Claims for protection In his protection visa application, the applicant stated that he had originally arrived in Australia on a work visa from the Kingdom of Tonga. He stated that he was writing to formally request consideration for a protection visa due to the significant and severe changes in circumstances that had affected the living conditions in his homeland. The applicant made the following claims for protection in his application (as summarised below) that:·He left Tonga through the Seasonal Worker Programme (SWP) to work in Australia;·There has been a significant economic downturn in Tonga with decreased job opportunities and a subsequent decline in the standard of living for Tongans. This, coupled with the devastating volcanic eruption environmental impacts, has put an immense strain on the nation’s infrastructure, which has further amplified the hardships faced by its people;·In discussions with his family about the deteriorating situation in Tonga, he thinks he will face a great risk to his well-being, experience economic hardship, and find it extremely difficult to financially support himself if he returns to Tonga, due to the combined effects of economic instability, reduced access to resources, and the environmental impacts of the volcanic eruption;·He thinks he will be harmed by fellow villagers in his community who will not be supportive of him not being able to support himself; ·He did not try to relocate in Tonga because he was able to come to Australia through the SWP;·He does not believe the Tongan authorities can protect him because they are not able to offer the applicant any financial assistance; and·He does not believe that relocating to another part of Tonga will help his circumstances.Department interview