1723913 (Refugee)

The applicant, a divorced woman from Vietnam, sought a protection visa on the grounds that she feared harm from creditors due to an unpaid debt. She claimed that Vietnam's poor government system, economic hardship, and lack of effective law enforcement meant she could not repay her relatives and would face violence, injury, or death if returned. The Tribunal considered her claims against Vietnam as the receiving country.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) (the Act) as a refugee, or alternatively, whether she qualified for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. This involved assessing whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of her removal from Australia, she faced a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal applied Ministerial Direction No. 56 and relevant policy guidelines and country information. It found that the applicant's stated reasons for leaving Vietnam, including distrust of the judiciary, poor governance, and economic hardship leading to an inability to repay debts, did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the risk of harm from creditors, in the context of general economic hardship and a perceived inability of authorities to intervene in personal financial matters, did not amount to significant harm as defined by the Act, nor did it demonstrate a real risk of persecution. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not suggest she could not relocate within Vietnam or that the risk was not faced by the population generally.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that she did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the Act.