1732533 (Refugee)

The applicant, who identifies as being of Chinese ethnicity, sought review of a decision by the Minister to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant's claims for protection were based on an alleged interest in anti-corruption activities and attendance at anti-corruption demonstrations in Indonesia. The delegate of the Minister had refused the application, finding that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the delegate's decision was the correct or preferable decision.

The Tribunal was tasked with assessing the applicant's credibility, particularly in light of inconsistencies in the information provided over time regarding their alleged involvement in anti-corruption activities and their reasons for seeking protection in Australia. The Tribunal also had to consider the significance of any delay in the applicant's decision to seek protection. Ultimately, the core legal issue was whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, namely race, as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the Refugee Convention.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found significant credibility concerns with the applicant's account. It noted that the applicant had provided inconsistent information regarding their involvement in anti-corruption demonstrations and their reasons for fearing persecution. The Tribunal concluded that these inconsistencies, coupled with the delay in seeking protection, undermined the applicant's claims. Applying the principles of assessing credibility and the requirements for establishing a well-founded fear of persecution, the Tribunal determined that the applicant had not discharged their onus of proof. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision.