1701505 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Vietnam, sought a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm if returned to Vietnam, based on claims of distrust in the Vietnamese judiciary and law enforcement, poverty, debt to creditors, and the potential for violence from those creditors. The matter was before the Tribunal for review of a decision not to grant the visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the enumerated reasons, or under section 36(2)(aa), which requires a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Vietnam. The Tribunal also considered the complementary protection guidelines and country information assessments as mandated by Ministerial Direction No. 84.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims, particularly regarding the risk of harm from creditors, were not sufficiently substantiated to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. While acknowledging the applicant's stated hardships and fear, the Tribunal concluded that the evidence did not demonstrate that the applicant would face persecution or significant harm for one of the Convention reasons, nor that the authorities would be unable or unwilling to protect him. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's claims at hearing differed in important respects from those made in his initial application.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958.