1606519 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an individual who claimed to be a liberal Sunni Muslim, identifying as Quranist, and fearing persecution in Egypt. The applicant alleged that his differing religious beliefs, particularly his belief in direct communication with Allah rather than through intermediaries, had led to conflict with followers of the Muslim Brotherhood and put him at odds with Egyptian society and authorities. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee or on complementary protection grounds.

The Tribunal was required to determine the applicant's credibility and assess whether he faced a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm if returned to Egypt. This involved examining the applicant's claims regarding his religious beliefs, his interactions with the Muslim Brotherhood, and his presence in Egypt during specific periods. The Tribunal also considered relevant country information and policy guidelines, including those concerning complementary protection and the definition of significant harm.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found a significant issue with the applicant's overall credibility. Crucially, the applicant's passport evidence contradicted his claims about his presence in Egypt in 2013, a period during which he alleged significant difficulties due to his vocal religious views. The Tribunal noted that the applicant was not in Egypt during the entirety of 2013 as he had claimed. Given these credibility issues, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa. The decision under review, which refused the visa, was therefore affirmed.