1805051 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision to refuse a protection visa to an applicant from China. The applicant claimed to fear persecution due to their religious beliefs, specifically Falun Gong. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, both under the definition of a refugee and under the complementary protection provisions.

The Tribunal considered two primary legal issues: first, whether the applicant qualified as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, which involves a well-founded fear of persecution based on specific grounds; and second, whether the applicant met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), requiring substantial grounds to believe there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China. The Tribunal also had to consider the applicant's failure to attend a scheduled remote hearing.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal accepted the applicant was a national and citizen of China and that China was the receiving country. It noted that the applicant had not provided evidence of a right to reside elsewhere, thus not being excluded under section 36(3). Crucially, the applicant failed to attend the scheduled hearing without explanation, despite being notified of the remote hearing arrangements. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to proceed with the review based on the available information. The Tribunal applied Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines, but ultimately found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm upon return to China, particularly in light of the applicant's failure to engage with the Tribunal process.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.