1826065 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Iraqi national, sought a protection visa, claiming he feared being killed by Shia militias upon return to Iraq due to his father's former membership in the Ba'th Party and his family's Sunni Muslim religion. The applicant also alleged that his family had been dispossessed of their home and subjected to explosive attacks and physical assaults. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) reviewed the decision to refuse the protection visa.

The primary legal issue before the AAT was whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or alternatively, whether he would suffer significant harm as a consequence of being removed from Australia, thereby engaging Australia's protection obligations under section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958. This required the Tribunal to assess the credibility of the applicant's claims and the plausibility of his asserted fear in light of available country information.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his father's role in the Ba'th Party and the alleged threats and attacks against his family. However, the Tribunal found the applicant's evidence to be inconsistent, at times implausible, and lacking in credibility. Specifically, the Tribunal noted discrepancies in the applicant's account of his father's movements and the extent to which his father's past affiliations would attract the attention of Shia militias. The Tribunal also considered the country information, which indicated that Ba'th Party membership was common for government employment and that de-Ba'thification programs had been implemented. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had fabricated much of his claim to secure a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he had not established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, nor had he demonstrated a real risk of suffering significant harm upon return to Iraq.