1701668 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application by a protection visa holder, identified as [the applicant], to set aside a decision to cancel his visa. The dispute arose from allegations of non-compliance with the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning incorrect information provided in his protection visa application. The decision was made by Giles Short, Senior Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had failed to comply with the provisions of the *Migration Act* as alleged in the section 107 notice, and if so, whether the discretion to cancel his visa should be exercised. This involved considering the applicant's claims regarding his religious persecution in Egypt, the accuracy of the information provided in his visa application, and the prescribed circumstances for exercising the cancellation power under section 109 of the Act, including the best interests of his children.

The Tribunal found that certain certificates presented were invalid as they related to a Part 5 reviewable decision, whereas the cancellation of a protection visa was a Part 7 reviewable decision. Regarding the applicant's claims, the Tribunal accepted that he had been born into the Coptic Orthodox faith and converted to Evangelical Christianity, engaging in preaching activities in Egypt. He alleged facing opposition and physical attacks from Muslim students, leading to injuries and a fear of further harm, which prompted his visa application. However, the Tribunal ultimately determined that the best interests of the applicant's children, particularly his Australian citizen child, outweighed the grounds for visa cancellation.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 866 (Protection) visa and substituted a decision that the visa should not be cancelled.