1516789 (Refugee)

This decision concerns an application for a protection visa made by a child applicant, represented by their mother. The dispute centred on the applicant's claims of persecution in China due to the mother's alleged membership and activities within an underground Roman Catholic church. The applicant's mother asserted that she had faced harassment and threats from classmates, teachers, and police in China, leading to detention and the arrest of other church members. She also claimed ongoing suspicion and investigation by Chinese authorities due to her continued contact with a nun who was later arrested. The decision was made by Angela Cranston of the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, specifically religion, such that they ought to be granted a protection visa. This required the Tribunal to assess the credibility of the applicant's mother's claims, considering inconsistencies in her evidence and the country information available regarding religious practice in China. The Tribunal also had to consider the circumstances surrounding the drafting of the protection claims, which were presented as if made by the child applicant despite their young age.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not well-founded, primarily due to significant credibility issues with the applicant's mother's evidence. The Tribunal noted that the protection claims were drafted in a manner suggesting they were not the child's own statements, a fact conceded by the mother and her adviser. Furthermore, the Tribunal identified a material inconsistency in the mother's evidence regarding her baptism and confirmation. Specifically, the mother had previously stated she had not been confirmed due to insufficient religious knowledge, but later claimed she had been confirmed, attributing the earlier statement to misunderstanding or nervousness. The Tribunal found these explanations unconvincing and concluded that the mother's evidence regarding her confirmation was unreliable. This lack of credibility in key aspects of the mother's account led the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant's fear was not well-founded.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the protection visa application was refused.