1700591 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a divorced male from India. The applicant claimed he feared returning to India due to threats from his wife's family, who allegedly blamed him for their daughter's divorce and threatened his life. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, including the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) and the complementary protection criterion under s.36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

The Tribunal considered the applicant's written statement and oral evidence regarding the alleged threats. It noted inconsistencies in the applicant's account, particularly concerning the timing and nature of the threats, and the reasons for his wife's family's animosity. The Tribunal also took into account Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Refugee Law Guidelines, Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information assessments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had manufactured his claims of threats from his wife's family. It concluded that the inconsistencies in his evidence, coupled with the timing of his protection visa application following the suspected cancellation of his student visa due to his impending divorce, indicated that his claims were fabricated to achieve a migration outcome. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant would suffer harm upon his return to India, nor that Australia had protection obligations towards him under either the refugee or complementary protection criteria. The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visa.