1502254 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa by an applicant from Ethiopia. The applicant claimed to fear persecution based on her religion as a Muslim, alleging she had attended a protest and that she and her family members had been detained.

The Tribunal was required to determine the applicant's credibility and whether her fear of persecution was well-founded and for a Convention reason. The Tribunal also had to consider whether to affirm the decision to refuse the applicant a visa, having regard to information provided under section 424AA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the visa. It reasoned that an applicant's mere assertion of fear does not establish its genuineness or that it is well-founded, and that speculation or assumption is insufficient. While acknowledging the difficulties asylum seekers face and the principle of giving the benefit of the doubt to generally credible applicants unable to substantiate all claims, the Tribunal stated it was not obliged to accept uncritically all allegations or to have rebutting evidence before making a finding that a factual assertion had not been established. The Tribunal noted that claims inconsistent with independent country information could be rejected. Crucially, the Tribunal recorded that the applicant had stated on oath that she had no fear of persecution from any state body or individual on a Convention or other ground and that her life was settled in Ethiopia, a statement made during an interview in July 2012. The Tribunal had put information to the applicant under s.424AA, including details from her departmental interview, which would be a reason for affirming the refusal, and had explained its relevance and offered her an opportunity to respond.