CAT/C/58/D/608/2014 When asked by the authorities if he there was any other reason why he could not return to Sri Lanka, he replied in the negative. 2.6 On 6 September 2012, the Department of Immigration and Citizenship refused to grant the complainant a protection visa on the grounds that his fear of persecution was not well-founded. Although it was satisfied in general with the credibility of his statements as to the events prior to his departure from Sri Lanka in relation to TMVP, it concluded that he would not face a real risk of persecution in Sri Lanka. 2.7 In its decision, the Department took note of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Eligibility Guidelines for Assessing the International Protection Needs of Asylum Seekers from Sri Lanka (5 July 2010), of reports from States and well-known NGOs about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka, of possible alternative relocation within Sri Lanka and of the situation of failed asylum seekers,1 including those cited by the complainant’s agent.2 As to his fear of persecution because of his Tamil ethnicity, the Department stated that according to reports, Tamils, even those from areas previously controlled by LTTE, and returnees were not generally subject to persecution by the Sri Lankan authorities; that Tamil ethnicity in itself did not constitute a particular risk factor; that there was no evidence that the complainant had ever been under suspicion of being an LTTE cadre or sympathizer; and that there was no indication that he had ever experienced significant problems owing to his Tamil ethnicity. Likewise, the complainant would not be at real risk as a result of being a failed asylum seeker since he had no connection with LTTE. With regard to his alleged communication with TMVP, the Department stated that the complainant did not face a real chance of harm if returned because of his refusal to lend his truck to TMVP. It noted that he had returned voluntarily to Sri Lanka in 2010; that he had lived in the Batticaloa District most of his life without incident; that he had remained in his village for several days after the alleged events with TMVP without incident; and that his family had remained in the village and had not been contacted or threatened by members of TMVP. 2.8 On 16 August 2012, the Minister for Immigration intervened in the complainant’s case under section 195 A of the Migration Act, allowing him to be released from immigration detention and granting him a bridging (general) visa while his protection visa application was considered by the authorities. 2.9 On an unspecified date, the complainant appealed the decision of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship before the Refugee Review Tribunal. The complainant appeared before the Tribunal and reiterated his previous allegations that he feared persecution by the Sri Lankan authorities or paramilitary groups if returned owing to his Tamil ethnicity, and being harmed by the Pillayan faction in retaliation for the incident that occurred prior to his departure. The Tribunal carried out lengthy and detailed interviews about all his allegations, making reference to available information about the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. He stated, inter alia, that neither he nor any of his relatives had been involved with LTTE, nor had they been involved in political activity or human rights 1 2 In its decision, the Department of Immigration and Citizenship referred, inter alia, to the following documents: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, “Sri Lanka: Registration requirements in Colombo for Tamil and Sinhalese citizens who migrate from Jaffna or other regions of the country”, 22 August 2011; Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, “Sri Lanka: Information on the treatment of Tamil returnees to Sri Lanka, including failed refugee applicants; repercussions, upon return, for not having proper government authorization to leave the country, such as a passport”, 22 August 2011; and International Crisis Group, “Sri Lanka: Government promises, ground realities”, 1 March 2012. See Home Office, UK Border Agency, “Sri Lanka: Country of origin information (COI) report”, 7 March 2012. 3