1503376 (Refugee)

[2016] AATA 4342

1503376 (Refugee) [2016] AATA 4342 (26 August 2016)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

CASE NUMBER:  1503376

COUNTRY OF REFERENCE:                  China

MEMBER:Angela Cranston

DATE:26 August 2016

PLACE OF DECISION:  Sydney

DECISION:The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant satisfies s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Statement made on 26 August 2016 at 2:15pm

Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision pursuant to section 431 of the Migration Act 1958 and replaced with generic information which does not allow the identification of an applicant, or their relative or other dependant.

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration to refuse to grant the applicant a Protection visa under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2.    The applicant who claims to be a citizen of China, applied for the visa [in] April 2014 and the delegate refused to grant the visa [in] February 2015.  A copy of the evidence and submissions is at Annexure A. A copy of the law is at Annexure B.  

CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

3.    The issue in this case is whether the applicant is a Yiguan Dao practitioner and secondly, whether she has a well-founded fear of being persecuted for one or more of the five reasons set out in the Refugee Convention in China and, if not, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of her being removed from Australia to China, there is a real risk that she will suffer significant harm.

4.    For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the matter should be remitted for reconsideration.

5.    The applicant has stated that she learnt about Yiguan Dao from [Mr A], that she participated in secret ceremonies in April 2012 and that about one month after she began to trying to convince her clients and class mates to also become Yiguan Dao practitioners. She also stated that when the Chinese authorities found out about their practice, [Mr A] was arrested but she herself managed to leave China via Shenzhen.  

6.    The Tribunal has significant concerns with the applicant’s evidence. At hearing on 5 July 2016 the applicant initially stated that she knew in April 2012 that the Chinese government saw Yiguan Dao as a heretical religion but the Tribunal finds she told the Department at interview [in] November 2014 that when she talked to her old classmates and her clients about Yiguan Dao she was not aware that it was risky.  When this was put to her at hearing on 5 July 2016, she stated in mid-December she knew that the police were paying attention to [Mr A]. This does not, in the Tribunal’s view, explain why she told the Department at interview that she was not aware that her behaviour was risky when according to her evidence at hearing she knew in April 2012 that the Chinese government viewed Yiguan Dao as a heretical religion. The adviser subsequently suggested that the applicant was confused about whether or not it was risky to convert people to Yiguan Dao or whether it was risky for her and when the applicant responded to the Tribunal’s concerns in writing, she stated that at interview [in] November 2014, she might not have understood the question. She suggested that the question was in fact two questions: that is when did she know that it was risky to convert people to Yiguan Dao and when did she realise that she was in danger and that even though she knew from the very beginning that it was risky to convert people, she did not realise that she was in danger until December 2013.

7.    The Tribunal has considered this explanation but finds that it is simply trying to obscure what the applicant told the Department at interview which was that when she converted people, she was not aware that it was risky behaviour. In the Tribunal’s view, whether she knew it was risky behaviour or whether she knew it was risky behaviour for her amounts to the same thing. In the Tribunal’s view, the applicant has failed to provide convincing details of her alleged conversion attempts.    

8.    The Tribunal also considers that at Departmental interview the applicant displayed some knowledge of Yiguan Dao however that knowledge was limited and in the Tribunal’s view formulaic, easily learnt and often nonsensical. For instance, when asked to explain her religion in simple language, she stated that “we need to have a reasoning system, heaven has a reason to exist, as humans we need to have a reason to do everything”. Such answers may indicate a simple understanding of difficult concepts or something more contrived and rehearsed. However, because the Department did not explore these answers when the applicant provided them, the Tribunal does not consider it can now rely upon them in order to conclusively find that the applicant did not display a knowledge of Yiguan Dao at interview commensurate with her alleged practice.

9.    In summary, the Tribunal has significant concerns as to whether the applicant practiced or participated in Yiguan Dao in China.  The Tribunal also has significant concerns as to why the name of her husband and child in her Australian [other] visa application are different to the name of her husband and children in her protection visa application. When asked about this at hearing, she stated that she obtained her [other] visa through [Ms B], the wife of her ex-husband’s friend and she did not know anything about it.

10.      In the Tribunal’s view, the applicant has provided no explanation as to why she submitted [another] visa application in which the identities of her husband and children were different to those in her protection visa when the [other] visa application was in her own name and she also used a passport issued in her own name (albeit stating that she was born in Shandong and not Fujian). The Tribunal also doubts that the applicant has told the truth when she states that she obtained her [other] visa through [Ms B]. In the Tribunal’s view, the way in which false family details have been included in the [other] visa application as well as the change in the applicant’s place of birth in her passport suggests a careful plan has been implemented to falsely obtain the Australian [other] visa.    

11.      Be that as it may, the Tribunal accepts that a number of years have passed since the applicant arrived in Australia [in] January 2014, and at hearing on 5 July 2016, the applicant displayed an impressive knowledge of Yiguan Dao. She also provided photographs indicating that she had attended various Yiguan Dao events. The applicant has also provided statements as well as a witness who have all testified that they are Yiguan Dao practitioners and that the applicant is a fellow practitioner and that she has been attending Yiguan Dao events regularly since May 2014.

12.      The Tribunal accepts the applicant has participated in Yiguan Dao events. The difficulty the Tribunal has however is that such participation may well have been simply to give an impression, both to her co-practitioners (who may then, in good faith, be prepared to testify to that observation) and to the Tribunal that she is a committed Yiguan Dao practitioner.

13.      The Tribunal has struggled with its findings in this case. While the applicant presented as a less than impressive witness at departmental interview, she was more impressive at hearing. Given this, the Tribunal does not consider that it can find with confidence that she is not telling the truth about her overall past Yiguan Dao experiences. That is largely because the Tribunal considers that at the Departmental interview [in] November 2014 she displayed some knowledge of Yiguan Dao which may be consistent with her practice in China. While there is a possibility that the applicant has participated in Yiguan Dao activities in Australia and gained knowledge for the purposes of the protection visa application only, the Tribunal considers that in this case, it cannot find with confidence that she has done so and so it must give the applicant the benefit of the doubt.

14.      Given the above findings, the Tribunal is satisfied that there is a real chance that the applicant will be subjected to persecution by the PRC authorities because of her involvement in Yiguan Dao. DFAT has stated that while it is difficult to assess how Chinese authorities would deal with individual cases of this largely unknown religious sect and authorities' treatment of unauthorised religious activities differ depending on the province and city, they would consider that Chinese authorities would regard Yiguan Dao followers along the same lines as other banned religious sects. On the evidence, it would not be reasonable for the applicant to relocate to another region in China because the PRC's crackdown on “cults” is a national policy despite being implemented with local variations. There is no evidence that the applicant has third country protection or that section 36(3) of the Act applies to her. The Tribunal is therefore satisfied and finds that the applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution by the Chinese authorities for reasons of religion. Accordingly, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason if she were to return to China.

15.      For the reasons given above, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant is a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the Refugees Convention. Therefore the applicant satisfies the criterion set out in s.36(2)(a).

DECISION

16. The Tribunal remits the matter for reconsideration with the direction that the applicant satisfies s.36(2)(a) of the Migration Act.

Angela Cranston
Member

ANNEXURE A

EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS

17.      In her application, the applicant stated as follows:

[In] January 2014, I arrived in Australia. In China, I am an active member of Yiguan Dao (aka I-Kuan Tao or Tien Tao or Tian Dao) which is regarded as an illegal secret society by the Chinese government. In order to escape from persecution, I had to leave China in the end.

On [date], I was born in the countryside of Fujian Province in China. Shortly after I was born, my biological parents gave me to the family of my [carers] as a ‘child bride’, I had to get married with the son of my [carers] after I grew up. When I was a child, I did not know the real reason why my biological parents had to give me to the family of my [carers]. I just thought that I had been abandoned by my biological parents and I hated them very much for quite a long time.

[Mr C], the son of [carers], whom I should get married after I grew up, had been spoiled since his childhood. He was willful, and sometimes became a thoroughly unreasonable person. I had to stay together with him while I was even younger than 18 years old. On [date], I gave a birth to [Child 1] when I was only [age]. By then, I was not eligible to get married at that time according to relevant regulations in china. Furthermore, we had to pay a fine owing to having a child before our marriage. On the other hand, [Mr C] was not willing to pay the fine. Therefore, both [Mr C] and I did not have our marriage legally registered until  [July] 2008.

On [date], [Child 2] was born.

In 2011, [Mr C] insisted on divorcing me as he had an affair with a young lady. He later on rented an apartment in Fuqing City and lived together with the lady. Without any choices, I had to divorce him [in] August 2011. As I have mentioned above, [Mr C]’s parents were my [carers], and I have lived at [Mr C]’s home since I was little. Therefore, I had no place to move after our divorce. Fortunately, my [carers] treated me not bad and particularly sympathized with me. They let me reside at home continually.

Before I got divorced, I had found a job at a  [restaurant] and started working there from January 2011. At the  [restaurant], [Mr D], a [nationality] staff who could speak fluent Chinese, helped me a lot. While I got troubles with [Mr C], [Mr D] always comforted me and strongly supported me. After I got divorced, [Mr D] persuaded me to marry him for many times. Given that I really had no place to stay at that time, I had to agree with him and got married with him [in] November 2011.

[In] December 2011, [Mr D] went back to [country] for visiting his parents and siblings. He said that he would return to China within two or three weeks. Unexpectedly, I have never ever heard anything from [Mr D] since he left China.

In February 2012, the  [restaurant], where I worked, was suddenly closed down. I have lost the last possibility to get in touch with [Mr D] since then. Although my [carers] allowed me to move back to their home, I fell into a depression.

In April 2012, I obtained a job through my friend [Ms E], working at [Mr A’s] Shop as a [occupation]. The shop was run by [Mr A] who was over [age].

[Mr A] was a secret member of Yiguan Dao. His father was an Enlightened Master of Yiguan Dao. Many years ago, my biological [relative] was converted by [Mr A]’s father to become a member of Yiguan Dao. My biological [relative] then followed [Mr A]’sfather to spread Yiguan Dao in the countryside of Fujian Province. Both of them were arrested by the Public Security Bureau (PSB) afterwards and imprisoned in a jail in Jiangxi Province for over 20 years. They both were persecuted to death in the end.

Having deeply implicated by my biological [relative]’s case, my biological parents were subjected to unfair treatments by the Chinese government for years. They had to live in a state of extreme poverty, and they were always deprived of their basic human rights. As a result, they were unable to bring me up and had to give me to the family of my [carers] as a child bride. Having been persecuted constantly, my biological father suffered from a serious illness afterwards. However, he had no money to seek medical treatment and died at home in the end. After my biological father’s death, my biological mother went to a distant place. Her whereabouts is unknown.

[Mr A] was also subjected to persecution owing to his family background. He actually followed his father to become a member of Yiguan Dao in his childhood, but he had to hide his belief for a long time. Around 2000, he went to [country] via [another country] and spent more than 10 years there. In [country], [Mr A] eventually had a chance to practice Yiguan Dao freely and safely. In 2011, he returned to China mainly for the purpose of secretly spreading Yiguan Dao. Not long after that, he opened the  [shop].

Due to his father’s relationship with my biological [relative], [Mr A] paid much attention to me after he returned to china, particularly after I was in a difficult position. With helps of my friend [Ms E], he approached me and arranged me to work at his  [shop] from April 2012. Since then, my life has changed significantly.

After I worked at [Mr A]’s  [shop], he began to spread the teaching of Yiguan Dao to me. I was gradually converted by [Mr A] to become a secret member of Yiguan Dao. On [date] August (the [date] day of July according to Chinese lunar calendar), I was initiated by an enlightened master from [country] together with my good friend [Ms E].

[Mr A] lived in an old house at my neighbour village, [name] Village. The house originally belonged to his mother. When he was in [country], his mother passed away. No one lived there for quite a long time. After he returned to China, [Mr A] moved into the house again and then set up a secret Yiguan Dao Temple in the house. Apart from [Mr A] himself, both [Ms E] and I were the earliest members to practice Yiguan Dao at the Temple.

Until December 2013, there were [number] people in total, who regularly attended the secret Yiguan Dao temple at [Mr A]’s house. These people were divided into two groups, one for male (qian-dao) and the other for femle (Kun Dao). Both [Ms E] and I were in charge of the ‘Kun-dao’ group.

As a matter of fact, [Mr C] has gradually changed since I became a member of Yiguan Dao. He not only stopped associating with the young lady but returned to our home village, [name] Village, around June 2013. He voluntarily made an apology to me for hurting my feelings. Although he had not become a member of Yiguan Dao yet, he gave me strong support. I firmly believe that everything is arranged by Wuji Laomu (Ancient Mother of Limitless Heaven) aka Ming Ming Shang Ti (Luminous Emperor on High).

In December 2013, [Mr C] learned from his good friend [Mr F] that the PSB paid more and more attention to [Mr A], and that the police suspected [Mr A] to have illegal activities to harm social security. [Mr F]’s wife worked at the Judical Bureau of Fuqing City Government. She had wide contacts with the PSB. Owing to my close relationship with [Mr A],[Mr C] was very much worried about my safety. He persuaded me to leave Fuqing and hide at his friend’s place temporarily. Meanwhile, [Mr A] asked [Mr F] to prepare my trip to the overseas through [Mr F]’s wife just for in case.

I immediately told everything to [Mr A] and [Ms E] as soon as I obtained the information. [Mr A] had to decide to stop our activities for the time being and urged all of us to make necessary arrangements for our safety. He then prepared to close his shop. Unfortunately, [Mr A] did not have sufficient time to do so, as he was arrested by the police [in] January 2014. Two days after that, [Mr C] through his friend, arranged me to leave China from Shenzhen, where was quite far away from my hometown.

Shortly after I left China, the police went to my home in [name] Village with a search warrant and found a book about the teachings of Yiguan Dao, which was published in [country] and which had been hidden by me at my home. Meanwhile, the police took members in my [carers’] home including [Mr C] to the PSB for interrogations.

[Ms E] was arrested by the police in the end of January 2014. I am regarded as one of major leaders of the illegal organization by the PRC authorities. Therefore, I must be subjected to persecution on my return.

18.      The applicant was interviewed by an officer of the Department of Immigration [in] November 2014 and the Tribunal has listened to a recording of that interview.

19.      The Department rejected the application and the applicant applied for review.

20.      The applicant appeared before the Tribunal on 5 July 2016 to give evidence and present arguments. The Tribunal also received oral evidence from [a witness]. The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Mandarin and English languages.

21.      The applicant was represented in relation to the review by her registered migration agent who attended the Tribunal hearing.

22.      The applicant stated [Mr A] led her to Yiguan Dao. [Mr A] had practiced Yiguan Dao from 2000 when he became a member in [country]. The Tribunal asked if he was a member of Yiguan Dao before he went to [country] and she said no. The Tribunal asked if he was first introduced to Yiguan Dao when he was in [country] and she said yes.  The applicant then stated he returned from [country] in February 2011. She stated he was in [country] because his father was in Yiguan Dao and was persecuted.

23.      The applicant stated [Mr A] introduced the five subjects to her, as well as the eight rituals and the scripture, how to transcend and reincarnation. The applicant stated she listened to him because he spoke well and introduced the true meaning of life to her. The Tribunal asked if she had a religion before Yiguan Dao. She stated she was a Buddhist but changed her religion because Yiguan Dao put five religions into one religion. She also stated she had two failed marriages and had thought to commit suicide but because of the mercy of the heavenly mother she had been given a way to live again.

24.      The applicant stated [Mr A] told her in April 2012 he went to [country] because his father was a Yiguan Dao member and was persecuted by the government and had nowhere to go because the Chinese government was very cruel to Yiguan Dao members. He also told her around April 2012 that the Chinese government viewed Yiguan Dao as a heretical religion.

25.      The applicant stated she became a Yiguan Dao member in August 2012 when she was initiated by an enlightened Master.

26.      The applicant stated that according to her religion after she died her spirit returned to the heavenly mother. For others who were not Yiguan Dao practitioners, they would go to hell to suffer the cycle of reincarnation.  

27.      The applicant stated the symbolic seal was like a passport to heaven.

28.      The applicant stated she was expected to attend religious ceremonies every Friday and there was also a ritual every month. She also stated twice every year there was a major worship and there were also training courses. She stated in China, she also attended regular worship every Friday from April 2012 onwards. The ceremonies were held at [Mr A]’s old house.  She was initiated by the Enlightened Master [in] August 2012.  She stated they were secret ceremonies and she knew that in April 2012.

29.      The applicant stated she tried to convince her clients and her class mates to become Yiguan Dao practitioners about one month after April 2012.  When asked if that was risky, she stated she had been saved by the heavenly mother and because of that she had to compensate by preaching Yiguan Dao.

30.      The Tribunal then spoke to [the witness]. She confirmed that she met the applicant in May 2014 and that they both went to the Temple together. She confirmed the applicant was at the temple every week. She stated she thought the applicant was genuine in her Yiguan Dao practice because she participated actively and was also a volunteer.

31.      The Tribunal then put to the applicant that the residential address and the name of her husband and [Child 1] in her [other] visa application were different to the addresses and names of her husband and children in her protection visa application. She stated she only knew that at the airport on the day she because she had obtained the [other] visa application through [Ms B], the wife of her ex-husband’s friend. The Tribunal put to her that this information was in her application for a tourist visa to Australia and there would be no reason to give this information at the airport. She stated she was given the materials at the airport.

32.      The Tribunal also put to the applicant that in her written application she said that [Mr A] became a member of Yiguan Dao in his childhood but she had told the Tribunal he was first introduced to it in [country]. She stated since he didn’t gain the way in his childhood he could not be counted as a member. The Tribunal put to her that she told the Department at interview [in] November 2014 that when she started trying to convert people she was not aware that it was risky to do so and that it was only in January after she realised it was regarded as a harm to society by the government that she discovered that it was actually a serious matter. She stated in mid-December she knew that the police were paying attention to [Mr A] and that was when they stopped all of their Yiguan Dao activities.

33.      The Tribunal put to her that it wondered whether she had practised Yiguan Dao in China. The Tribunal indicated it accepted that she had been going to the temple in Australia but had to think about whether she was a genuine practitioner. The Tribunal indicated that if it found that she was engaging in behaviour only for the purposes of strengthening her protection visa application then it would not take that behaviour into account in ascertaining any harm to her if she returned to China. The applicant stated she was a real Yiguan Dao practitioner and she could not say anything untrue.

34.      The Tribunal then spoke to the adviser. The advisor said the applicant was confused. He said [Mr A] had become a believer of Yiguan Dao but had not practised before he went to [country]. He also stated the applicant was confused about whether or not it was risky to convert people to Yiguan Dao in China or whether it was risky for her.

35.      Following an adjournment, the applicant stated the questions had confused her. She stated that when [Mr A] was young he was under the influence of his father however when he went to [country] he became a genuine member of Yiguan Dao after he had been initiated. She also stated at the airport she was given a plane ticket, the [other] visa and a passport. She also stated she was told all the information about the names in her application at the airport and was given that information in case customs would ask her some questions.

36.      The applicant stated she could not go back to China because the police had come to her family asking about her whereabouts. She stated if she went back they would arrest her as they had also found a book in her house. She stated in the beginning she did not realise the danger until the danger had personally fallen upon her.

37.      Following the hearing, the Tribunal wrote to the applicant pursuant to section 424A as follows:

Your alleged conversion of others to Yiguan Dao
At interview [in] November 2014 it is orally recorded that you told the Department of Immigration that the other people who learnt about the temple were:

A. My old classmates from school and others were during my work because I was a [occupation] for that company, I had a chance to get in contact with many of our clients and I talked about this with our clients and some of them joined.
Q. Isn’t that risky?
A. Yes it was risky but I was not aware during that time. Only after I realised that it was regarded as harm to the society by the government I discovered it was actually a serious matter.

Q. And when did that happen?

A. In January I heard it from a friend of my ex-husband saying that the police were searching for people.

This information is relevant because the Tribunal may find that this is not consistent with what you stated in your written statement and at hearing on 5 July 2016 which was that in April 2012 [Mr A] told you that he went to [country] because his father was a Yiguan Dao member and was persecuted by the government and that [Mr A] had no other way but to go to [country] because the Chinese government were very cruel to Yiguan Dao members and that the Chinese government saw Yiguan Dao as a heretical religion. This may lead the Tribunal to find it does not accept that it is plausible you were not aware at the time that you allegedly converted people (May 2012) that it was risky behaviour. This may lead the Tribunal to find you are not recalling an event that has in fact occurred. This may mean the Tribunal is not satisfied you are a witness of truth or that you are telling the truth about allegedly converting people to Yiguan Dao or your alleged conversion to Yiguan Dao.  This may also lead the Tribunal to find that none of the subsequent events that you claim to have occurred in China as a result of your alleged Yiguan Dao practice or faith have in fact occurred.

If the Tribunal finds that it is not satisfied you are a witness of truth and that your alleged conversion in China or your alleged conversion of others in China did not occur, this would lead it to disregard your participation in Yiguan Dao in Australia when determining whether you have a well-founded fear of being persecuted in China.  
If the Tribunal finds that it is not satisfied you are a witness of truth and that your alleged conversion in China or your alleged conversion of others in China did not occur this would be the reason or part of the reason for affirming the decision under review.

1. The applicant responded as follows:

   At interview [in] November 2014, I might not well understand the question put to me by the case officer. As a matter of fact, there are two questions in relation to my conversion of others to Yiguan Dao in China:

   When did I know that it was risky to convert people to Yiguan Dao?

   When did I realise that I was really in dangers?

   For the first question, I knew, from the very beginning, that it was risky to convert people to Yiguan Dao in China. Therefore,[Mr A] and I, as well as [Ms E] and other members of Yiguan Dao, practised Yiguan Dao and convert others to Yiguan Dao carefully and secretly. And, for quite a long period, we were not discovered by the police.

   For the second questions, I did not realise that I was really in dangers until December 2013. As I have stated in my written statements and at hearing on 5 July 2016, my first husband learned from his good friend that the Public Service Bureau (PSP) paid more and more attention to [Mr A] and suspected him to get involved in illegal activities of harming social security. Owing to my close relationship with [Mr A], I realised that I was really in dangers.

   I have to request the Tribunal to kindly understand my difficulties at interview [in] November 2014. It was the first time for me to attend an interview with an Australian officer. Owing to my poor English, I was unable to communicate with the officer directly but had to be assisted by an interpreter. I was nervous, and under huge pressure. That’s why I might not be able to well understand the question put to me by the case officer.

   My family composition

   In support of my review application, I have recently asked my first husband [Mr C] to send following documents for me:

   ·     Marriage certificate with [Mr C], as evidence that I legally married [Mr C] [in] July 2008. But, the marriage certificate was stamped become invalid as we later on divorced each other.

   ·     Divorce certificate with [Mr C] as evidence that [Mr C] and I divorced each other [in] August 2011.

   ·     Documents sent by [Mr D], as evidence that I legally married with [Mr D] [in] November 2011.

   ·     Documents sent by [Mr D] to my home in China, as evidence that [Mr D] filed his application for divorce with me [in] January 2014.

   ·     My household registration book (hukou) as evidence that I lived at [address], Fuqing City and that I had [children] and that I was divorced.

   ·     My Chinese ID card, as evidence that my home address in China was [address] Fuqing City, Fujian Province.

   My first husband [Mr C] told me that I should take the documents sent by [Mr D] to the civil affair bureau in my hometown to finalise my divorce with [Mr D]. However, I am really unable to return to China, and thus my divorce with [Mr D] has not yet finalised until now.

   After I got married with [Mr D], my household registration became null and void, because [Mr D] was a [nationality] man who was regarded as a foreigner in China. But, since [Mr D] filed his application for divorce with me in 2014, my relationship with the  [man] is deemed to have completely ended, and thus my household register has been registered again.

   Based on above-mentioned documentary evidence and information, I firstly got married with [Mr C] and I had  [children [names], and I divorced [Mr C] later on, and I then got married with [Mr D], and my relationship with [Mr D] was eventually ended.

   Furthermore, based on the above mentioned documentary evidence information, [name] is definitely not my spouse, and [name] is definitely not my [child], and I have never lived at [address], Jihan City.

   As I have stated my written statement and at hearing on 5 July 2016, I was arranged by [Mr C]’s friend to come to Australia. I really did not know why [Mr C]’s friend had put incorrect information to Form 54. But, it is very obvious that the signature on the Form 54 is not my signature.

   Country information

2. In May 2011, the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) provided advice on the attitude of the Chinese authorities to members of Chinese society who practice or consider themselves members of Yiguan Dao. The DFAT advice states that:

   R.3. Yiguan Dao was banned in mainland China in the 1950s and there has been no information to suggest that this ban had been lifted, we would consider that Chinese authorities would regard Yiguan Dao followers along the same lines as other banned religious sects.
   Post notes that as authorities' treatment of unauthorised religious activities differ depending on the province and city, it is difficult to assess how Chinese authorities would deal with individual cases of this largely unknown religious sect. Were authorities to come across Yiguan Dao followers, they would probably seek guidance from higher authorities on handling the issue. We note that Yiguan Dao's origins as a secret religion with an organised structure would raise the suspicion of authorities if Yiguan Dao followers were known to exist in mainland China.

   ANNEXURE B

   LAW

   40. The criteria for a protection visa are set out in s.36 of the Act and Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations). An applicant for the visa must meet one of the alternative criteria in s.36(2)(a), (aa), (b), or (c). That is, the applicant is either a person in respect of whom Australia has protection obligations under the ‘refugee’ criterion, or on other ‘complementary protection’ grounds, or is a member of the same family unit as such a person and that person holds a protection visa of the same class.

   41. Section 36(2)(a) provides that a criterion for a protection visa is that the applicant for the visa is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees as amended by the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (together, the Refugees Convention, or the Convention).

   42.      Australia is a party to the Refugees Convention and generally speaking, has protection obligations in respect of people who are refugees as defined in Article 1 of the Convention. Article 1A(2) relevantly defines a refugee as any person who:

   owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.

   43. If a person is found not to meet the refugee criterion in s.36(2)(a), he or she may nevertheless meet the criteria for the grant of a protection visa if he or she is a non-citizen in Australia in respect of whom the Minister is satisfied Australia has protection obligations because the Minister has substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant being removed from Australia to a receiving country, there is a real risk that he or she will suffer significant harm: s.36(2)(aa) (‘the complementary protection criterion’).

   44.      In accordance with Ministerial Direction No.56, made under s.499 of the Act, the Tribunal is required to take account of policy guidelines prepared by the Department of Immigration –PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Complementary Protection Guidelines and PAM3 Refugee and humanitarian - Refugee Law Guidelines – and any country information assessment prepared by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade expressly for protection status determination purposes, to the extent that they are relevant to the decision under consideration.