1609906 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Nigerian woman, sought review of a decision affirming the refusal of her protection visa application. The dispute centred on her claims of persecution in Nigeria, including threats from Boko Haram, communal violence, and the risk of significant harm upon return. The case was heard by the Refugee Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act) concerning refugee status, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act, which pertains to complementary protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm. This required the Tribunal to assess the applicant's credibility and the veracity of her claims in light of relevant country information and policy guidelines.

The Tribunal applied principles of credibility assessment, referencing case law such as *Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and McIllhatton v Guo Wei Rong and Pam Run Juan* and the UNHCR Handbook. It acknowledged the difficulties asylum seekers may face in substantiating claims and the principle of giving the benefit of the doubt to generally credible applicants. However, the Tribunal found that the applicant had changed her claims multiple times and had been untruthful about her past, rendering her an unreliable witness. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not a credible witness and affirmed the delegate's decision.