1832660 (Refugee)

The applicant, an Indian national, sought review of a decision by the Minister to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to be a member of a small religious/social organisation and alleged that he had received threats and attacks from Sikhs or Hindus. The application for the protection visa was completed by a relative without the applicant's full knowledge of its contents, and the applicant provided vague and evasive evidence at the hearing. The country information indicated that the organisation's leader was currently in prison.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant had established that he would be persecuted if returned to India, such that he would be owed protection under the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This involved assessing the credibility of the applicant's claims, the nature and extent of his membership and activities within the organisation, and the current country conditions in India relevant to his alleged fears.

The court affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant's evidence was vague and evasive, and that his claimed membership and activities within the organisation were of a low level. The court considered the available country information, including the imprisonment of the organisation's leader, but concluded that this information did not establish a real chance of persecution for the applicant. The court applied the principles of assessing claims for protection visas, including the need for credible and cogent evidence, and the assessment of risk based on objective country information.