1517695 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, and the case concerned the credibility of her claims and whether, on accepted claims, the criteria for protection were fulfilled. The Tribunal considered the applicant's background, including her birth in Mongolia, her periods of residence in Mongolia and Country 1, her employment history, and her stated relationships. The applicant's written statement detailed her experiences in Mongolia, including her perceived gender identity, her relationships with women, and alleged persecution by her family and others due to her sexual orientation.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically under section 36(2)(a) or the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958. This involved assessing the applicant's credibility and determining if there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Mongolia, she would face a real risk of suffering significant harm. The Tribunal also considered relevant country information, including information on LGBTI issues in Mongolia, and Ministerial Direction No. 56.

The Tribunal concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed. While acknowledging the applicant's claims regarding her experiences in Mongolia, the Tribunal found issues with her credibility. The Tribunal noted inconsistencies in her account, particularly concerning her return to Mongolia and periods of employment. The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicant's credibility and whether her accepted claims established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal ultimately found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Migration Act.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.