1901796 (Refugee)

The applicant sought a Subclass 866 Protection Visa, claiming fear of persecution by criminal gangs in Taiwan due to an inability to repay business debts. The delegate refused the visa, finding Taiwan's police and judiciary effective in combating such elements. At the hearing, the applicant denied the claims made in her application, stating a migration agent had lodged it without her full understanding, and that she had been deceived. She explained her financial difficulties were related to her mother's medical needs and that she had made multiple return visits to Taiwan.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether she was a refugee within the meaning of section 5H of the Migration Act 1958, or if she faced a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia under the complementary protection criterion in section 36(2)(aa). This involved assessing the credibility of her claims and considering the availability of effective protection in Taiwan.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's revised account of her circumstances, including her mother's medical condition and her own employment history and travel to Taiwan. It noted that the applicant had denied the original claims made in her application, attributing them to a migration agent. The Tribunal also had regard to the country information regarding the effectiveness of Taiwan's police and judicial system in dealing with criminal gangs and underground money lenders. Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) of the Migration Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.