RRT Case No. V05/17787

Author: Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT)
Document source:

Australia: Refugee Review Tribunal
Date:
10 August 2005

In this section

The applicant sought to review the decision of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed fear of serious harm based on her partner's past experiences and treatment. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the criteria in the Act and found that the applicant was a person to whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugee Convention.

The applicant was born in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China. He was of Uighur ethnicity and Muslim religion. His experiences led him to fear harm if he returned to China. These included: being questioned by PRC authorities as he was trying to leave the country; detained and interrogated at a Chinese airport upon his return and was also subject to assaults in the nature of kicking and striking with an electric baton; on another occasion, being detained by authorities for a number of days which he was interrogated and also hit, kicked and made to stand facing a wall with him arms held above his head. In addition, at various points when he was out of the country (studying), his family and their business were also threatened and subject to similar treatment that he experienced, even when his parents fell ill.

"The Tribunal considered that the applicant's evidence was credible. The Tribunal also considered independent evidence in relation to the treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang, the violations of human rights on Uighurs and details on the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous region more generally.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant's recount of harm suffered was serious harm and that he had genuine fear if he returned to the PRC as he would be subject to harm of the kind he had experienced in the PRC, including the physical harm and imprisonment. As such the fear was well-founded. The Tribunal also concluded that the applicant would be vulnerable to harm wherever he may reside in the PRC and thus relocation was not an option reasonably available. Therefore, applicant was a person to whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugee Convention. "

Remits the matter for reconsideration. The Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant was a person to whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugees Convention.

Author

Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT)

Title

RRT Case No. V05/17787

Document source

Australia: Refugee Review Tribunal

Date

10 August 2005

Document number

[2005] RRTA 140

Document type

Case Law

Additional document information

V05/17787

Collection

Case Law

Legal instruments

1951 Refugee Convention

Country

Australia

China

Keywords

Discrimination based on race, nationality, ethnicity

Persecution based on political opinion

Racial / Ethnic persecution

Religious persecution (including forced conversion)

Region

Oceania

Protected persons

Asylum-seekers

Comments:

The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant is a person to whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention.

Disclaimer:

This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.

RRT Case No. V05/17787

RRT Case No. V05/17787

In this section

Summary

Facts

Considerations

Conclusion

Document details

Profile