1724522 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant her a protection visa. The applicant arrived in Australia in March 2015 on a Tourist (Subclass 600) visa, which ceased in June 2015. She applied for a protection visa on 18 July 2016, and has since been on bridging visas. The applicant claimed she feared persecution in China due to pressure from her parents-in-law regarding a forced abortion. The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the 'Refugee Law Guidelines', 'Complementary Protection Guidelines', and DFAT country information.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or whether she would suffer significant harm if removed from Australia, thereby satisfying the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Migration Act 1958. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility and determine if she could access effective protection in China.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not credible and that she had not established a well-founded fear of persecution. It noted the applicant's extensive period of unlawful residence in Australia and the delay in her protection visa application. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated that she could not access effective protection from the Chinese state, nor that she would suffer significant harm upon return. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Australia owed protection obligations to the applicant.

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