1514938 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection visa by a citizen of Nepal. The applicant claimed to fear persecution from Maoists in his home country, alleging that his family had been harmed, his sibling killed, and his property confiscated. He also asserted that he had faced threats and attempted harm during subsequent visits to Nepal, leading to hospitalisation after a motorbike accident. The applicant's claims were assessed by the Tribunal, which had before it the delegate's decision, the applicant's visa history, and a DFAT Country Report on Nepal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa under section 36 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required determining if the applicant was a non-citizen in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under the Refugee Convention, as defined in Article 1A(2), or under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. The Tribunal was also required to consider relevant policy guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal found significant discrepancies between the applicant's written claims and his verbal evidence, leading to a conclusion that the applicant was not truthful. Specifically, the Tribunal noted inconsistencies in his account of his family's situation and the events he claimed to have experienced in Nepal. Due to these credibility issues, the Tribunal was unable to accept the applicant's claims as established. Consequently, the Tribunal determined 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.