2002151 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by a delegate of the Department of Home Affairs to refuse the applicant a protection visa. The applicant, a Thai national, initially claimed to fear harm from money lenders in Thailand due to a friend's debt. However, at the hearing, the applicant withdrew this claim and instead asserted a fear of harm from his controlling father.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or if he would suffer significant harm if returned to Thailand. This involved assessing the availability of effective protection measures in Thailand and whether the applicant's claims were credible in light of his personal history, including his family and work history and financial independence.

The Tribunal considered the country information regarding Thailand's efforts to combat loan sharking and found that effective protection measures were available. It also noted that the applicant's revised claim of fear from his father was not supported by the evidence presented. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution and was not owed complementary protection. The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the protection visa. The Tribunal also considered a request to refer the case to the Minister for discretionary consideration under section 417 of the Migration Act 1958 but decided not to do so, noting that the applicant could still make a direct request to the Minister.