1610170 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Indonesian citizen of ethnic Chinese and Christian background, sought a protection visa in Australia. She claimed to have fled Indonesia in 2010 due to distrust of the judiciary and law enforcement, economic hardship, and fear of being harmed or killed by debt collectors. Her revised claims detailed that her brother-in-law had borrowed money from loan sharks, and when he could not repay, the applicant and her family received threats, sought ineffective police protection, and attempted to relocate without success.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether she had a well-founded fear of persecution under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, or alternatively, whether Australia had protection obligations under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa). This involved assessing whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Indonesia, she faced a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of Ministerial Direction No. 56 and relevant country information. It noted the applicant's claims of socio-economic discrimination and threats from debt collectors. However, the Tribunal found inconsistencies in the evidence and an extraordinary delay in the application for protection. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for a protection visa, finding no suggestion that she met the requirements of section 36(2)(a) or (aa).

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.