1711141 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant him a protection visa. The applicant claimed to be a member of an environmental protest group in China called 'Return my beautiful country' and alleged he faced persecution due to his activism. The primary dispute concerned whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under Australian migration law. The decision was made by a Member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant was a refugee within the meaning of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), specifically whether he had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or membership of a particular social group, and whether he would suffer significant harm if returned to China, thereby meeting the complementary protection criterion. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's failure to attend a scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not attend the scheduled hearing, and under section 426A of the *Migration Act*, it was empowered to make a decision without further action to enable his attendance. The Tribunal found that the applicant was aware of the issues before it, as they were outlined in the delegate's decision, and he failed to present evidence or arguments. The Tribunal then examined the applicant's claims regarding persecution, considering the definitions of "refugee" and "well-founded fear of persecution" under sections 5H and 5J of the Act, as well as the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

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