2010628 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision affirming the refusal of a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear persecution in Vietnam due to his opposition to the communist regime, his support for the Viet Tan Party, his Catholic faith, and his involvement in a land dispute. He also alleged that corruption and economic hardship in Vietnam would prevent him from subsisting if returned.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), which requires a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion, religion, or membership of a particular social group. The Tribunal also considered, by operation of section 36(2)(aa), whether there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Vietnam, as defined by the complementary protection provisions.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the Ministerial Direction No. 84, the Refugee Law Guidelines, the Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information. It noted that the applicant had not satisfied the criteria for being a refugee under section 5H of the Act, specifically regarding a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of political opinion or religion. The Tribunal also found that the applicant did not establish a real risk of significant harm under the complementary protection provisions, as his claims did not demonstrate that any risk was faced personally rather than by the population generally, nor did it establish that relocation or state protection would be unavailable.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).