1913318 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) reviewed a decision by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs to refuse the applicant a Protection visa. The applicant, who is Christian, claimed to have fled China due to religious persecution, alleging his church was destroyed by government agents, he was injured by a water cannon, and subsequently imprisoned, bashed, and humiliated. He expressed fear of being unable to practice his religion freely if returned to China.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa under section 36 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), specifically whether he was a refugee or faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to China. The Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm, considering the information provided and the applicant's failure to attend a scheduled hearing.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient detail regarding his claims of persecution and the nature of the harm he feared. It noted inconsistencies in his account of his imprisonment and a lack of detailed evidence about his religious beliefs and practices. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant failed to attend a scheduled hearing, despite receiving invitations and SMS reminders, and that the Tribunal had followed the procedures under section 426A of the Act to proceed with the decision without further action to enable his appearance. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not satisfied the statutory elements required for a Protection visa, as the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a Protection visa.