AI (Tuvalu)

COURT OR TRIBUNAL

New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal

DATE FILED (OR FIRST HEARING DATE)

23/02/2017

LITIGATION TYPE

Constitutional and Human Rights / State Accountability

SUBJECT MATTER

Human rights

REVIEW TYPE

Merits review

SUMMARY

(Excerpt from judgment)

[1] These are appeals against decisions of a refugee and protection officer, declining to grant refugee status and/or protected person status to the appellants, a husband and wife who are both citizens of Tuvalu.

[2] The appellants claim to be at risk of serious harm due to the adverse effects of climate change on Tuvalu and that they would not be able to obtain employment due to the general lack of employment opportunities in Tuvalu. They also claim that it is in the best interests of their New Zealand-citizen children, aged 21 years old and 17 years old, that they remain in New Zealand as a family unit.

[3] The primary issues for determination by the Tribunal are whether there is anything more than a remote or speculative chance of any of the appellants encountering serious harm for these reasons, and whether there is a Convention reason for any such harm. For the reasons which follow, the Tribunal finds that the appellants do not have a well-founded fear of being persecuted for a Convention reason. They are not refugees. Nor are they entitled to be recognised as protected persons under the Immigration Act 2009 (“the Act”).

CASE DOCUMENTS

(AI) Tuvalu [2017] NZIPT 801093