1934889 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of Iran. The applicant claimed to have converted from Islam to Christianity and asserted that he held imputed political opinions of anti-Islamic sentiment, which he feared would lead to persecution upon return to Iran. The applicant also sought to establish that he belonged to a particular social group, defined as a failed asylum seeker returning from the West. The decision reviewed was made by Member Nathan Goetz of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason, specifically imputed political opinion or membership of a particular social group, and whether the applicant was a genuine convert to Christianity. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility and the truthfulness of his narrative regarding events in Iran and his religious conversion.

Member Goetz found that the applicant lacked credibility and was not satisfied that his narrative about events in Iran was truthful. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant was a genuine Christian convert or that he held imputed anti-Islamic sentiments. The Tribunal also found that the applicant did not establish membership in a particular social group as defined. Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution and therefore did not meet the criteria for a protection visa. The decision under review was affirmed.