2319509 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an applicant from Fiji. The applicant claimed to fear harm from unspecified gang members in Fiji, alleging extortion. The decision under review affirmed the delegate's refusal of the visa.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Refugee Convention reason, or alternatively, whether Australia had protection obligations under the complementary protection criterion. This required the Tribunal to assess the evidentiary support for the applicant's claims of threats and extortion by Fijian gangs.

Senior Member G.A.F. Connolly found a complete lack of evidence to substantiate the applicant's claims. The applicant failed to particularise the threats, identify the gangs involved, explain how extortion was occurring, or demonstrate how their family might be affected. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had been afforded ample opportunity to provide supporting evidence but chose not to do so. In the absence of any credible evidence, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant's claims were not plausible and that the applicant had not established any aspect of their case, including the refugee criterion under s 36(2)(a) and the complementary protection criterion under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Australia owed protection obligations to the applicant under either s 36(2)(a) or s 36(2)(aa). The application for a protection visa was therefore refused.