1813967 (Refugee)

The applicant, a national of Vietnam, sought review of a decision to refuse his protection visa application. He had arrived in Australia on a tourist visa in December 2014, which expired in January 2015, after which he remained in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen for over three years before lodging his protection visa application in January 2018. The applicant claimed he fled Vietnam due to threats and violence from a former employer who was involved with criminal elements and had pressured him to smuggle drugs.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This required determining if there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of his removal to Vietnam, the applicant faced a real risk of suffering significant harm, or if he was a refugee due to a well-founded fear of persecution. The Tribunal also considered its responsibility to assess the applicant's claims and the evidence provided, noting that it was not required to make the applicant's case for him.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate his claims. Crucially, the applicant had not explained the significant delay in lodging his protection visa application after overstaying his visa, nor had he provided adequate supporting evidence or appeared at the hearing. The Tribunal reiterated that the onus was on the applicant to specify the particulars of his claim and provide sufficient evidence, and that it was not obliged to accept allegations uncritically. While the applicant claimed to fear persecution from his former employer and his associates, the lack of explanation for his delay and the absence of corroborating evidence meant he had not satisfied the Tribunal that he met the statutory requirements for a protection visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he had not satisfied the criteria under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).