1720910 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, claiming that upon return to China, he would suffer emotional and mental damage due to the perceived lack of love, inclusiveness, and respect in Chinese society. He also cited experiences with the Chinese legal system and workplace compensation as evidence of its unfairness. The matter came before the Tribunal for review of a previous decision.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of his removal to China, he faced a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims that China is a society lacking inclusiveness, where free speech is suppressed and individuality is obliterated. It also noted his assertion that the Chinese government misleads the public and that the Communist Party dictates societal norms. However, the Tribunal found no evidence that the applicant would face persecution for any of the prescribed reasons. Furthermore, it concluded that the applicant's fears of emotional and mental damage due to societal conditions did not amount to a real chance of suffering serious harm or significant harm as defined by the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal therefore affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa.