1516955 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection visa by a citizen of Thailand. The applicant claimed she had been indecently assaulted multiple times by a relative in Thailand, who was a powerful and well-connected individual. She alleged that the police would not protect her due to corruption and that she feared for her life if returned to Thailand. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Australia had protection obligations to the applicant under the refugee criterion.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of a Protection visa, specifically under section 36(2)(a) of the Act, which relates to the refugee convention. The Tribunal also considered, by reference to Ministerial Direction No. 56, the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which applies if there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal, there is a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's claims and evidence in light of relevant policy guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were vague, unconvincing, inconsistent, and implausible, leading it to conclude that she did not satisfy the refugee criterion. While the Tribunal acknowledged the applicant's stated fear and the alleged threats from her relative, it did not find her evidence sufficiently credible to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.