1509970 (Refugee)

The applicant, who arrived in Australia in January 2013 and remained as an unlawful non-citizen after his visa expired in February 2013, sought review of a delegate's decision to refuse his application for a protection visa. The applicant claimed he left Papua New Guinea (PNG) due to harassment from 'rascals' and the perception that he would be perceived to have money due to his time in Australia. The Tribunal was required to determine the credibility of the applicant's claims and whether, on accepted claims, the criteria for a protection visa were fulfilled.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), specifically whether Australia had protection obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention (the Convention) or under the complementary protection criterion. This involved assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, there was a real risk of significant harm.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's stated reasons for leaving PNG, including harassment by 'rascals' and threats of kidnapping, as well as claims that he would be perceived to have money due to his time in Australia. The Tribunal also noted information suggesting potential inaccuracies in the applicant's initial statements due to difficulties with grammatical English and duress at the time of interview owing to the recent death of his son. After assessing the cumulative impact of various credibility concerns, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.