1606761 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning a protection visa application made by a single man from China. The applicant claimed he feared persecution due to his religious beliefs, specifically his adherence to Catholicism, and sought to remain in Australia for spiritual freedom.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of religion, or if he would suffer significant harm if returned to China, thereby meeting the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This involved assessing the credibility of his claims regarding his religious practice and the real risk of harm from the Chinese Government.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's account of his religious journey, noting that his initial engagement with Catholicism was casual and influenced by friendships, and that he had previously ceased attending church due to family religious differences. While he later recommenced attending church and expressed a desire for spiritual freedom, the Tribunal found his claims lacked convincing and authentic detail. Furthermore, the Tribunal took into account recent developments in relations between the Vatican and the Chinese Government. Applying the principles of the *Migration Act*, the Tribunal concluded that there were no substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk that the applicant would suffer significant harm, as defined by the Act, if returned to China. This included threats to life, torture, or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. The Tribunal also found that the applicant's fear of not having spiritual freedom did not fall within the categories of significant harm.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act*.