1731308 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) reviewed a decision not to grant a protection visa to an applicant from China. The applicant claimed to have political views contrary to the Chinese Communist Party and feared persecution upon return. The AAT considered the applicant's claims in light of the 'Refugee Law Guidelines' and 'Complementary Protection Guidelines', as well as country information assessments.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) in China, or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds to believe that the applicant faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China. The Tribunal also considered whether the applicant's claims were credible and personal to him.

The Tribunal found significant credibility concerns with the applicant's claims. It noted that the applicant's statements were remarkably similar, if not identical, in phrasing and content to those of another protection visa applicant, which the applicant could not adequately explain, attributing it to coincidence. Furthermore, despite claiming to understand Australia's democratic and free nature as a reason for seeking protection, the applicant was unable to explain what democracy meant. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's claims were not demonstrably his own and therefore not credible.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for the visa.