1804408 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by an Indonesian citizen. The applicant claimed he feared persecution in Indonesia due to threats from a debt collector related to a significant debt he incurred in 2008. The applicant had been living and working in Australia since 2012, primarily in farming and factory work, and had been remitting money to support his family in Indonesia. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were twofold: first, whether there was a real chance that the applicant would be persecuted in Indonesia for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and second, if not, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of his removal to Indonesia, he faced a real risk of suffering significant harm under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's evidence as truthful and found that he did not fear persecution in Indonesia for any of the specified refugee reasons. While the applicant had previously faced threats from a debt collector, the Tribunal noted that the debt had been paid off, and the applicant's primary motivation for wishing to remain in Australia was to improve his financial situation and better support his family. The Tribunal also considered that the applicant's ethnicity and religion did not place him at risk of persecution in Indonesia, referencing country information that indicated ethnic diversity and a significant Hindu population in Bali. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the refugee criterion. The decision under review was affirmed.