1614485 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant Mr [A] a protection visa. Mr [A], a citizen of China, claimed he feared persecution due to his membership of a Christian church that was allegedly subject to repression by Chinese authorities. The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr [A] was entitled to protection in Australia as a refugee or on complementary protection grounds.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr [A] had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, he faced a real risk of suffering significant harm. The Tribunal considered the applicant's responsibility to establish his claim by providing sufficient evidence and particulars, noting that a decision-maker is not obliged to make the applicant's case for him. The Tribunal also had regard to relevant policy guidelines and country information assessments.

The Tribunal found that Mr [A]'s descriptions of his church and beliefs were vague, and he had not provided sufficient detail regarding the origin of his beliefs, the circumstances of his church in China, or his current religious observance. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the statutory elements for a protection visa, as his assertions were bald and scant, lacking the necessary detail to establish a generalised claim about belonging to an unauthorised church in China. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa.