1822885 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of Vietnam. The applicant claimed he feared persecution upon return to Vietnam due to his opposition to government policies and rules during his employment. The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was a real chance the applicant would be persecuted for one of the five prescribed reasons under s 5J(1)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), or if there were substantial grounds for believing he would suffer significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Vietnam under s 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal found the applicant's evidence regarding his reasons for leaving Vietnam and his alleged opposition to government policies to be vague and lacking in detail. Specifically, his explanations concerning "family situation," "life difficulties," and "economic financial difficulties" were found to be unsubstantiated and unclear. Furthermore, his claims of pressure from authorities in relation to his employment, including vague references to "money declaration" and "asset reports," and the alleged trouble caused by these authorities, were deemed unsatisfactory and not credible.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution for any of the reasons specified in the Act. The applicant's evidence did not meet the threshold for a refugee claim under s 36(2)(a), nor did it establish a real risk of significant harm under the complementary protection provisions in s 36(2)(aa). Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.