1704935 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an individual who claimed to fear harm from gang members in Indonesia due to outstanding debts. The applicant alleged a history of harassment, physical assaults, and threats of murder, stating that authorities could not provide adequate protection and that relocation was not a viable option. The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the country information regarding Indonesia's human rights record.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) as a refugee, or alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia. The Tribunal was required to assess the genuineness and well-foundedness of the applicant's fear of persecution or significant harm, considering the available evidence and relevant guidelines.

The Tribunal reasoned that while it accepted Indonesia had a poor human rights record, the onus remained on the applicant to satisfy the Tribunal of the statutory elements. The Tribunal noted that the applicant's claims were brief and that the mere assertion of fear did not establish its genuineness or that it was well-founded. The Tribunal also considered the provisions relating to complementary protection, including the definition of significant harm and circumstances where a real risk of such harm is not taken to exist, such as the availability of reasonable relocation options or effective protection from authorities. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant had failed to satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

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