1808663 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa. The applicant, a Chinese national, claimed to fear persecution upon return to China due to her practice of Falun Gong. The AAT was tasked with determining whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

The central legal issue was whether the applicant had established a real risk of suffering significant harm if returned to China, specifically in relation to her religious beliefs and practices. This involved assessing the credibility of her claims, considering the country information regarding the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners in China, and determining if any risk identified was faced by the population generally or by the applicant personally. The Tribunal also had to consider the applicant's delay in applying for protection, which occurred after she received a notice of intention to cancel her visitor visa.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the applicant's oral evidence and documentary submissions, which were found to be vague and inconsistent. The Tribunal noted the absence of supporting witnesses or documentary evidence to corroborate the applicant's account of persecution, including alleged detention and beating. While acknowledging that Falun Gong practitioners generally face persecution in China, the Tribunal applied section 36(2B)(c) of the Act, which states that a real risk is not established if it is faced by the population generally and not by the applicant personally. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not demonstrated that she would face a risk beyond that faced by the general population of Falun Gong practitioners in China.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, concluding that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa.