1605420 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Ukrainian national. The applicant claimed to fear persecution due to his status as a veteran and reservist, as well as concerns related to his health and a de facto relationship. The primary dispute revolved around whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) and the complementary protection criterion under s.36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The decision was made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as defined in s.5J of the Act. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider whether, in the event of removal from Australia to Ukraine, there were substantial grounds for believing that the applicant would suffer significant harm, as defined in s.36(2A) and (2B) of the Act. This involved assessing the availability of effective protection measures in Ukraine and whether any risk of harm was faced by the population generally.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to establish that he was a witness of truth. Consequently, his claims regarding a remote risk of harm in Ukraine were not accepted. The Tribunal applied the principles outlined in Ministerial Direction No. 56, considering relevant policy guidelines and country information. It concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm upon return to Ukraine.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant's protection visa application was not successful.