2319560 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa made by a national of Tonga. The applicant sought the visa on the basis that his prolonged stay in Australia, commencing in 2011, had shifted his priorities from temporary employment to securing stable employment and housing to provide for his Australian-born children. He claimed that returning to Tonga would present challenges in finding employment and housing, potentially leading to homelessness, and that family dynamics and societal expectations in Tonga could create tension or mistreatment.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations. This required determining if the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he was a refugee or faced a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia, as defined by sections 36(2)(a) and 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Tribunal was also required to consider relevant Ministerial Directions, including Ministerial Direction No. 84, and associated guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not experienced harm in Tonga and that his primary concerns related to economic conditions and family relationships. It applied the criteria for complementary protection, noting that significant harm must be a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal. The Tribunal found that the applicant's fears of homelessness and potential family tensions in Tonga did not amount to a real risk of significant harm as defined by the Act, nor did they meet the threshold for a well-founded fear of persecution. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion of being a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.

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