1926346 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a Protection Visa by an individual from India. The applicant claimed to fear persecution based on his religion, Sikhism, and his past service in the Indian army. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection Visa, either under the refugee provisions or the complementary protection provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).

The Tribunal was tasked with assessing whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, or whether there were substantial grounds for believing that as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, the applicant would suffer significant harm. In making its determination, the Tribunal was mandated to consider Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Refugee Law Guidelines, Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information assessments.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence regarding his background, including his service in the army in areas near the Pakistan border. However, the Tribunal found that the evidence did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution. Specifically, the Tribunal concluded that the level of discrimination or risk faced by the applicant was not such that it would meet the threshold for protection under the Act. The Tribunal noted inconsistencies in the applicant's visa application regarding assistance received in its completion and his understanding of the delegate's decision.

Ultimately, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a Protection Visa. The Tribunal concluded that there was no suggestion that the applicant satisfied the refugee criterion or the complementary protection criterion, and therefore, the applicant did not meet the requirements for the visa.