1717659 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa, who claimed to be a Chinese national fleeing persecution based on his Christian faith. The applicant alleged he had attended secret churches, was detained, abused, and threatened with indefinite detention in a labour camp due to his religious beliefs. He asserted that relocation within China would be futile due to the government's nationwide stance on religion and that authorities would offer no protection.

The primary 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, by being a refugee with a well-founded fear of persecution, or under section 36(2)(aa), by facing a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of persecution for his religion, the credibility of his account, and the availability of effective protection measures in China.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa. It accepted that China was the applicant's receiving country and found no evidence of third-country protection. While acknowledging the applicant's claims of religious persecution and detention, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for being a refugee under section 36(2)(a) or the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). The decision implies that the applicant's claims, as presented, did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm that would warrant the grant of a protection visa.