1905923 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to be targeted by a well-connected politician in Thailand, alleging physical injuries and threats. However, the Tribunal noted inconsistencies in the applicant's travel history, which did not align with a genuine fear of persecution, and also considered the applicant's work history in Australia and the delay in claiming protection.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the Migration Act 1958. This involved determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as defined in section 5J. The Tribunal also considered the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which requires substantial grounds for believing there is a real risk of significant harm upon removal from Australia.

The Tribunal applied Ministerial Direction No. 56 and relevant policy guidelines, including the Complementary Protection Guidelines and Refugee Law Guidelines, as well as country information assessments. It found that the applicant's evidence contained inconsistencies, particularly regarding their travel history, which cast doubt on the genuineness of their fear of persecution. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's conduct in Australia, noting that it would be disregarded unless the applicant could demonstrate it was not for the purpose of strengthening their claim. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

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