1935516 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa made by a person who claimed to fear harm upon return to Thailand. The applicant alleged that he had an affair with the wife of his superior officer in the Royal Thai Army, which led to threats and difficulties imposed by the superior officer, including his driver being cut off and then beaten, and threats against the applicant and his wife.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of suffering significant harm if removed from Australia to Thailand. This required the Tribunal to assess the credibility of the applicant's claims, considering the evidence presented and the provisions of the Migration Act 1958, particularly sections 5H and 5J concerning the definition of a refugee and a well-founded fear of persecution, and section 36 regarding protection visa criteria.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution. Significant credibility concerns were raised regarding the applicant's account of the relationship, the superior officer's reaction, his family's actions, and the substantial delay in lodging his protection claim in Australia. The Tribunal noted that it is the applicant's responsibility to provide sufficient evidence to establish their claim, and the Tribunal is not obliged to assist in establishing it. While accepting the applicant's service in the Royal Thai Army, the Tribunal ultimately disbelieved the core allegations forming the basis of his fear.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, concluding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria under section 36 of the Migration Act 1958.