1602007 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection visa by a citizen of China. The applicant claimed to have suffered hardship and torture in China due to his involvement with an underground church and his assault on a police officer. He asserted that his life would be at risk if returned to China. The delegate of the Department of Immigration refused his application, a decision which was subsequently affirmed by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of a Protection visa under section 36(2) of the Act. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of persecution and the risk of significant harm if returned to China, including considering the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). The Tribunal was required to determine the credibility of the applicant's evidence, particularly in light of inconsistencies between his written claims and his interview statements, and the introduction of new claims regarding underworld figures.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of relevant policy guidelines and country information. It noted that the applicant's account of events, including the assault on the police officer, was inconsistent with his initial claims. Furthermore, the applicant introduced new allegations about threats from underworld figures, which were not substantiated. The Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Act, as there was no suggestion he met the requirements for a Protection visa, either on the basis of refugee status or complementary protection.

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