1719578 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Lebanese national. The applicant had previously been granted a partner visa in February 2009 and arrived in Australia at that time. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant would face a real chance or real risk of harm upon return to Lebanon, based on the claims made.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to assess the credibility of the applicant's evidence, particularly in light of significant inconsistencies. The Tribunal also considered the provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) concerning the criteria for a protection visa, including the definition of "significant harm" and the concept of a "well-founded fear of persecution." The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant met the criteria under s.36(2)(a) or the complementary protection criterion under s.36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant claimed to be on medication for depression and had asserted a memory loss due to an incident, these factors did not explain the considerable inconsistencies in his evidence. The Tribunal concluded that these inconsistencies arose from the applicant not being a witness of truth. The Tribunal accepted the applicant was a Lebanese national and did not have a right to reside in a third country. However, based on the assessment of his credibility and the lack of evidence supporting his claims of a well-founded fear of persecution or risk of significant harm, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa.