1716082 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Chinese national. The applicant claimed to have fears of persecution due to his practice of the I-Kuan-Tao faith and a conflict with his former girlfriend's family and tribe. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for the grant of a protection visa, specifically whether he qualified as a refugee or was eligible for complementary protection.

The Tribunal was tasked with assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of religion or membership of a particular social group, as defined by the Migration Act 1958. This involved considering the applicant's claims regarding the suppression of his religious practices in China, the conflict arising from his relationship, and the alleged threats from his former girlfriend's family. The Tribunal also had to consider whether any claimed persecution related to all areas of China and whether effective protection measures were available. Furthermore, the Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's claims under the complementary protection criterion, which involves determining if there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China, the applicant would suffer significant harm.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his religious beliefs and practices, as well as the conflict with his former girlfriend's family. It noted that the fears from the girlfriend's family appeared localised to the area where he lived. After reviewing the evidence and relevant country information, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for being a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.