2014130 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa. The applicant, an Indonesian citizen, claimed he feared persecution in Indonesia due to threats from loan sharks and a physical assault. The court was required to determine whether there was a real chance the applicant would be persecuted for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, or if there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Indonesia, he would suffer significant harm under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visa. The court found that the applicant had presented a new narrative of facts at the Tribunal hearing that had not been raised with the original delegate. Crucially, the applicant admitted to providing false information to the delegate when lodging his application, stating he believed false claims would be stronger. Based on this admission, the Tribunal was satisfied that the claims made to the Department were untrue and did not give rise to a real chance of serious harm upon return to Indonesia. The Tribunal also noted that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2) by being a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.