1511319 (Refugee)

The applicants, Chinese nationals, sought protection visas in Australia. Their claims were based on past persecution during China's Cultural Revolution and a fear of future harm, compounded by serious medical conditions. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicants met the criteria for a protection visa, either under the 'refugee' criterion or on 'complementary protection' grounds.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or alternatively, whether they faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to China, thereby engaging Australia's protection obligations under complementary protection provisions. The Tribunal also considered the applicants' capacity to provide evidence and the weight to be given to their claims, noting that the onus remained on the applicants to satisfy the statutory elements.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the protection visas. While acknowledging the applicants' difficulties in providing evidence due to their health, the Tribunal found that not all aspects of their claims were accepted. The Tribunal applied the principles that mere assertion of fear is insufficient and that applicants must provide sufficient detail to establish their claims. The Tribunal also considered the provisions relating to complementary protection, including the definition of significant harm and circumstances where a real risk of such harm is not taken to exist. The Tribunal concluded that the applicants did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.