1704696 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Indonesian citizen, sought a protection visa in Australia following her arrival in October 2016. Her claim was based on an alleged fear of a gangster hired by her friend's sister, who was demanding repayment of a business loan. The applicant asserted that this individual would kill her if the debt, with high interest, was not repaid, and that she feared for her safety if returned to Indonesia, alleging corruption within the authorities would prevent her protection.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant qualified as a refugee under the Migration Act 1958, specifically if she possessed a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons outlined in the Act, and if not, whether there were substantial grounds to believe she faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of being removed to Indonesia. The court was required to assess the credibility of the applicant's claims and determine if she had satisfied her onus to establish the statutory elements for protection obligations.

The court considered the applicant's written claims and her oral evidence, noting inconsistencies and a lack of detail in her initial application. It was highlighted that the applicant's responsibility was to specify all particulars of her claim and provide sufficient evidence, and the Tribunal was not obligated to assist in this regard. The court acknowledged the importance of a reasonable approach to credibility findings but emphasised that a claimed fear does not automatically establish its genuineness or well-foundedness. Ultimately, the court found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for being a refugee, nor did she meet the complementary protection criterion, and therefore did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.

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