1916395 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of China, sought a protection visa in Australia. The applicant claimed to have borrowed money from a finance company for a business venture, but due to an economic downturn, was unable to repay the loans. This led to threats, physical injury, and the occupation of his house by the finance company. He also alleged inaction by the police and collusion by local authorities. The case was heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under either section 36(2)(a) (refugee criterion) or section 36(2)(aa) (complementary protection criterion) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). This involved assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution or faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to China.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate his claims of persecution or significant harm. While accepting the applicant's identity as a Chinese citizen and that China was his receiving country, the Tribunal noted the lack of documentary or medical evidence to support the alleged threats, injuries, or the inaction of authorities. The applicant also stated he had nothing further to provide to the Tribunal. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.