1926831 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs' decision to refuse to grant the applicant, a citizen of Thailand, a protection visa. The applicant arrived in Australia in December 2014 on a student dependent visa and subsequently held a subclass 572 visa until November 2018. He applied for the protection visa in October 2018, after separating from his wife, who was the primary visa holder. The applicant stated that he left Thailand due to the 2014 coup, a lack of political freedom, and economic hardship, but denied experiencing any past harm in Thailand.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the court had to assess whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or any other prescribed ground, or whether he faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Thailand, thereby engaging Australia's protection obligations. The court also considered whether the applicant's claims were credible, particularly in light of inconsistencies and the late introduction of claims regarding local political activity and fear of harm from a rival party.

The court found that the applicant's claims lacked credibility. It noted that the applicant had not engaged in any political activity in Thailand or Australia, and his claims of fear of harm from a rival political party were raised for the first time at the review hearing. The court drew an adverse inference from the applicant's delay in departing Thailand and his voluntary returns, as well as his delay in applying for protection after separating from his wife. The court concluded that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm if returned to Thailand, and therefore did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.