1717414 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Indonesian citizen, sought a protection visa in Australia. The dispute concerned whether Australia had protection obligations towards her, primarily based on her adherence to the Pentecostal Christian faith and her desire to proselytise. The case was heard by the Tribunal.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for being a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically whether she had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of her religion in Indonesia. Additionally, the Tribunal considered whether she met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which requires a substantial ground for believing there is a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Indonesia.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant was a genuine follower of the Pentecostal Christian faith, her past experiences in Indonesia did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution. She had previously spread the gospel in Indonesia without suffering serious harm, and the Tribunal noted that her desire to spread the gospel more widely was a personal aspiration rather than a basis for persecution. The Tribunal applied the principles of section 5J of the Migration Act regarding well-founded fear of persecution, considering whether the fear was for a Convention reason, whether there was a real chance of persecution, and whether it involved serious harm. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant could continue her religious practices in Indonesia without facing persecution or significant harm, and therefore, Australia did not have protection obligations towards her.

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