1711036 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of China, sought review of a decision not to grant him a protection visa. The dispute concerned his claims of fear of persecution arising from land disputes involving his parents in China, where developers allegedly used gangsters to intimidate his family into accepting low compensation for their land. The applicant asserted that these events, coupled with his parents' continued protests, led to his fear of arrest and persecution upon return to China, particularly as the development was nearing completion.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, this involved assessing whether he was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under the *1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees* (as amended by the *1967 Protocol*) or under the complementary protection criterion, which requires substantial grounds for believing there is a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's credibility and the vagueness of his evidence in light of available country information.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, nor had he demonstrated substantial grounds for believing he would suffer significant harm upon removal. The applicant's claims regarding his parents' land dispute and the alleged intimidation were considered too vague to be persuasive. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had applied for protection after his student visa was cancelled and he had become an unlawful non-resident. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.