1800306 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision to cancel the applicant's Subclass 866 (Protection) visa. The dispute arose from the Minister's delegate's belief that the applicant had provided incorrect information in his visa application and accompanying statement, thereby failing to comply with section 101(b) of the Migration Act 1958. The applicant had claimed to fear persecution in Pakistan due to his identity as a Hazara Shia and the son of a wealthy official, citing threats from extremists and political rivals.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had indeed provided incorrect information in his visa application and statement, specifically concerning his reasons for seeking protection, his departure from Pakistan, the harm he feared, and the capacity of Pakistani authorities to protect him. This determination was crucial to establishing whether the grounds for cancellation under section 109 of the Act were met, and if so, whether the visa should be cancelled.

The Tribunal reasoned that the delegate had not established a "real state of satisfaction" that incorrect information was provided. While the applicant's responses to various questions in the application form and his written statement were detailed, the Tribunal found that the delegate had not sufficiently demonstrated non-compliance with section 101(b). Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the discretionary power to cancel the applicant's visa did not arise.

The Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted a decision not to cancel the applicant's Subclass 866 (Protection) visa.