1913261 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision not to grant a protection visa. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant was entitled to protection in Australia as a refugee or on complementary protection grounds. The applicant claimed to fear harm from a money lender in China.

The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had established a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or if there were substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China. The Tribunal considered relevant policy guidelines and country information assessments.

The Tribunal reasoned that the mere assertion of fear does not establish its genuineness or that it is well-founded, nor does it establish a real risk of significant harm. It is incumbent upon the applicant to provide sufficient particulars and evidence to satisfy the statutory elements. In this instance, the applicant's claims regarding owing money to a lender were found to be unsupported and lacking detail, such as the amount owed, the timing of the debt, and the involvement of family members. Despite a prior request for further information by a delegate, the applicant provided no additional details or evidence upon merits review. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the criteria for a refugee or for complementary protection.

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