1802641 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a protection visa by a citizen of China. The applicant claimed to have suffered past harm, including being fined at a highway toll station, threatened by the toll station director, and subsequently beaten. The applicant also alleged they had petitioned the authorities. The core of the dispute was whether this past harm, and the applicant's circumstances, warranted the grant of a protection visa.

The AAT was required to determine whether the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or whether they had suffered past persecution, such that Australia had protection obligations towards them. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess the credibility of the applicant's claims of past harm and consider whether there was a real chance of the applicant suffering future harm if returned to China, taking into account the alleged threats and violence.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal carefully considered the evidence presented by the applicant regarding the alleged incidents of being fined, threatened, and beaten. The Tribunal found that while some harm may have occurred, it did not rise to the level of persecution as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) and the Refugee Convention. Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that there was no real chance of the applicant suffering future harm amounting to persecution upon return to China, and therefore Australia did not owe protection obligations. The decision under review, which affirmed the refusal of the protection visa, was affirmed.