1803194 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate's decision to refuse to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant, an Indonesian citizen, arrived in Australia in November 2016 and subsequently applied for a protection visa, claiming she was a Shia Muslim facing persecution from Sunni Muslim extremists in Indonesia, and that some family members had been killed by a specific organisation. The delegate refused the visa, and the applicant sought review by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This required determining if Australia owed the applicant protection obligations, specifically whether she was a refugee as defined by the Act, which involves having a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and a real chance of being persecuted for such reasons in all areas of her country of nationality.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's oral evidence, her visa application form, her passport, and country information reports. Crucially, the applicant candidly admitted during the hearing that the claims made in her protection visa application regarding religious persecution were fabricated by a friend who assisted her in completing the form. She stated that she had followed her friend's instructions and that the information provided, particularly concerning her reasons for claiming protection, was untrue. The Tribunal accepted her evidence that she had travelled to Australia primarily to seek work opportunities after her business closed and that she had not experienced harm in her home country.

Based on the applicant's admission that her claims of persecution were false and that she had no well-founded fear of harm in Indonesia, the Tribunal was not satisfied that she met the criteria for a protection visa. The delegate's decision to refuse the visa was affirmed.