1817228 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the protection visa application of a Chinese national. The applicant initially claimed to fear harm based on his Protestant faith and involvement in an unregistered house church, alleging arrest and detention in China. However, at the hearing, the applicant abandoned these claims, stating he was not Protestant and did not attend such a church. He instead asserted new grounds for protection related to his opposition to the compulsory acquisition of his business and subsequent police actions in 2017, including an altercation during a factory demolition and a raid on his business premises.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he was a refugee within the meaning of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) or if there was a real risk of significant harm upon return to China. This involved assessing the credibility of the applicant's revised claims and considering whether any fear of persecution was for a Convention reason, whether effective protection was available in China, and whether the harm alleged constituted serious harm.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's oral evidence that he no longer feared harm based on his religion. It also accepted his personal background, including his family situation and business history. Crucially, the Tribunal found that the applicant had established that he was a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act*. The Tribunal was satisfied that China was the applicant's receiving country and that he had a well-founded fear of persecution.

Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter for reconsideration with a direction that the applicant satisfies section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act*.