1824513 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Vietnam, sought a protection visa in Australia. The dispute concerned whether the applicant faced a real chance of persecution or significant harm if returned to Vietnam, based on his alleged participation in a Formosa protest and an imputed political opinion. The matter was before the Tribunal for review.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary issues. First, whether there was a real chance that the applicant would be persecuted for one or more of the five specified reasons under section 5J(1)(a) of the Act, which would entitle him to refugee status. Second, if he did not meet the refugee criterion, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of his removal to Vietnam, he faced a real risk of suffering significant harm under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be generally credible and accepted his oral evidence as true, but rejected certain claims made in his Departmental application that were not corroborated by his oral testimony, such as allegations of criminal charges, beatings by police, and being taken into custody. Regarding the applicant's fear of persecution stemming from the Formosa protest, the Tribunal did not accept that he held the necessary subjective fear. This conclusion was based on several factors: the applicant did not leave Vietnam until over a year after the protest; he initially stated his primary reasons for coming to Australia were to visit his uncle and brother, not mentioning the protest; and he had returned to Vietnam twice for visits without incident, despite professing a fear of arrest and imprisonment. The Tribunal considered these actions inconsistent with a genuine fear of persecution.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not meet the refugee criterion. The decision under review was affirmed.