1917784 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of China. The applicant claimed he feared harm from loan sharks in China due to his inability to repay a significant debt incurred after a business venture failed. The applicant arrived in Australia in August 2017 and applied for a protection visa in March 2019. The decision under review was made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), presided over by Mary-Ann Cooper.

The AAT was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he was a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) or eligible for complementary protection under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of feared harm against the available country information regarding the availability of protection from the state in China and the credibility of the applicant's evidence.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was a citizen of China and that China was the relevant country of reference and receiving country. While acknowledging the existence of illegal money lenders in China, the Tribunal considered country information indicating a crackdown on shadow banking and concluded that effective protection was available from the state. Crucially, the Tribunal found the applicant's evidence regarding the loan sharks to be vague and unconvincing, noting his inability to recall any details about the lenders or provide documentation. The Tribunal also had regard to the delay in the applicant's application for protection in Australia, which contributed to credibility concerns. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.