1712440 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, claiming a fear of persecution in Kenya due to alleged involvement as a witness in International Criminal Court (ICC) proceedings concerning electoral corruption. The dispute before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerned the applicant's credibility and whether, on accepted claims, the criteria for a protection visa were met.

The 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 if returned to Kenya. The Tribunal was required to consider the applicant's claims in light of the 'Refugee Law Guidelines', 'Complementary Protection Guidelines', and country information assessments, and to assess the applicant's credibility, including any inconsistencies in their evidence and the delay in lodging the protection visa application.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not credible and therefore did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa. The Tribunal noted that the applicant arrived in Australia in November 2013 and applied for a protection visa on 25 May 2015, after several bridging visas had been granted. While the applicant claimed to fear harm due to being a potential ICC witness, the Tribunal's assessment of the evidence led it to conclude that the applicant did not meet the definition of a refugee or the criteria for complementary protection.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant did not satisfy any of the criteria set out in section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).