2004049 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a delegate's decision to refuse a protection visa to an applicant from Vietnam. The applicant claimed to have been politically active in Vietnam, campaigning for human rights and democracy, and that this activity led to her being questioned by authorities, banned from school, and prevented from seeking work. She also expressed fear of prosecution and extortion upon return, particularly due to her alleged opposition on social media.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether she was a refugee within the meaning of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) or if she warranted complementary protection. This involved assessing whether she had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or membership of a particular social group, and whether such persecution would involve serious harm. The Tribunal also considered whether effective protection measures were available in Vietnam or if relocation was a reasonable option.

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant's claims did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution. While acknowledging country information suggesting Vietnamese authorities monitor anti-government activists, the Tribunal found the applicant's profile and history did not demonstrate she had come to the adverse attention of the authorities. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered that online activity on social media, given the number of users, was unlikely to attract adverse attention from Vietnamese authorities. The applicant also made conflicting statements regarding her marital status and children during the hearing, which did not strengthen her claims. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa.