1721110 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the application of a Ukrainian national for a Protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear harm from Russian separatists in Donetsk, including forced conscription, imprisonment, and physical harm if he refused to join them. He also claimed he could not relocate within Ukraine due to discrimination and lack of employment opportunities, and that his parents would starve if he could not financially support them from Australia.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa, specifically whether he had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or whether he would suffer significant harm if removed from Australia. This involved assessing the credibility of his claims in light of country information and his own inconsistent evidence.

The Tribunal found significant inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence regarding the timeline of events in Donetsk, the nature of recruitment by rebels, his language abilities, his past residences and employment, and his objections to military service. For instance, the Tribunal noted that the applicant's claims about rebel visits in January 2014 were inconsistent with the commencement of conflict in Donetsk at that time, and that his brother, who also lived in the separatist-controlled region, had not been approached for recruitment. Furthermore, the applicant's claims about being unable to relocate within Ukraine and his assertion of being a conscientious objector to military service were found to be fabricated or embellished, contradicting his earlier statements and the available country information. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant was not a witness of truth and had fabricated claims to enhance his visa prospects.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa. It found that there was no real chance the applicant would suffer serious harm or significant harm if returned to Ukraine, and therefore he did not satisfy the criteria for a refugee or for complementary protection under the Migration Act 1958.