1721577 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a protection visa, claiming to fear persecution in China. The core of the dispute involved inconsistencies in the applicant's account of the events leading to his departure from China, specifically regarding the source of his fear and the nature of the threats he faced. The matter was before the Tribunal for review of a decision not to grant the visa.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 or on complementary protection grounds under section 36(2)(aa). This involved assessing the applicant's claims against the relevant legislative definitions of "refugee" and "significant harm," and considering whether there were substantial grounds for believing that the applicant faced a real risk of suffering significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were inconsistent, particularly concerning whether his fear stemmed from reporting corrupt officials or from a dispute with a neighbour, and whether the threats involved officials or gangsters hired by the neighbour. These inconsistencies raised doubts about the credibility of his claims. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for being a refugee or for complementary protection, and therefore did not meet the requirements for a protection visa.

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