2404138 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the application of a Samoan citizen for a protection visa. The applicant's claim for protection was based on alleged financial struggles faced by her and her family in Samoa. The applicant did not provide substantial evidence to support these claims, nor did she attend a scheduled hearing before the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958. This required the Tribunal to determine if the applicant was a refugee or a non-citizen in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm upon removal to Samoa. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's responsibility to provide sufficient evidence to establish her claims, as stipulated by section 5AAA(2) of the Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not discharged her onus to provide sufficient evidence. While acknowledging the applicant's background and work history, the Tribunal found the material insufficient to establish that she or her family experienced economic hardship in Samoa, or that she could not subsist there. Crucially, the applicant explicitly stated she did not experience harm in Samoa, considered it a safe country, and believed she would not be harmed or mistreated upon return. The Tribunal noted the absence of any claims of fear of harm, and the applicant's work history in both Samoa and Australia suggested an ability to earn an income.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that the evidence did not satisfy the criteria for refugee status or complementary protection.