1811815 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for a protection visa made by a Vietnamese national. The applicant claimed to fear persecution upon return to Vietnam due to her Catholic faith and her involvement in anti-government protests, including those concerning environmental issues. The applicant also asserted that her family was protesting the government's handling of environmental pollution, leading to a risk of arrest and detention for her and her family.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically whether she held a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of her religion or political opinion, or membership of a particular social group. The Tribunal was also required to consider the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), assessing whether there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal to Vietnam.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims lacked sufficient supporting evidence. While the applicant stated she was Catholic and participated in protests, she provided no independent evidence to substantiate these claims, nor did she provide evidence of detention or any specific threats against her. The Tribunal noted that the application was prepared by a third party with no direct knowledge of the applicant's alleged experiences. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered that the applicant's claims regarding environmental protests did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or membership of a particular social group, nor did they demonstrate a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal also considered the provisions relating to effective protection measures and the possibility of reasonable relocation within Vietnam.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the protection visa to the applicant. As the primary applicant did not satisfy the criteria, a dependent family member included in the application was also refused a visa.