1717916 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning a protection visa application made by a national of Taiwan. The applicant claimed she would face harm from money lenders and gangsters if returned to Taiwan due to an inability to repay loans, and that the police had not provided adequate assistance. The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Refugee Law Guidelines, and Complementary Protection Guidelines.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution under the refugee criterion, or a real chance of suffering significant harm under the complementary protection criterion, as defined by sections 36(2)(a) and 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility and the objective country information regarding safety and law enforcement in Taiwan.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not credible, as she stated she had no outstanding loans, had not been threatened, and expressed no fear of returning to Taiwan. Her claims were presented to the Department by a third party without her full understanding of the visa's purpose. The Tribunal considered country information, including a US State Department report, which indicated low overall crime rates in Taiwan, a professional police force, and that usury is a criminal offence. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa.

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