1600846 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an appeal by a Chinese national against the decision of the Tribunal to affirm the refusal of his application for a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm in China due to making a complaint against a corrupt official. He had arrived in Australia on a Student visa in July 2009 and remained in Australia unlawfully until lodging his Protection visa application in February 2015.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he had a well-founded fear of persecution or faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to China. This involved considering the applicant's claims regarding the complaint against the official, the delay in lodging his application, and his awareness of the possibility of seeking protection in Australia.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's explanation for the significant delay in lodging his protection visa application, noting his concession that he ceased his studies in December 2012 and remained unlawfully in Australia until February 2015. The applicant claimed he was unaware he could apply for protection in Australia until a migration agent advised him shortly before lodging his application. The Tribunal also considered the provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* concerning the refugee criterion and the complementary protection criterion, including the definitions of significant harm and effective protection measures.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not meet the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) of the Act. Furthermore, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Australia had protection obligations under the complementary protection criterion (s.36(2)(aa)) or s.36(2)(c) of the Act.