2105884 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a citizen of the People's Republic of China. The applicant, who arrived in Australia in May 2017, claimed to fear persecution based on his conversion to Roman Catholicism. The case came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for a fresh review following a remittal from the Federal Circuit Court. The applicant's wife and two teenage children remained in China.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm if returned to China, and whether he met the criteria for complementary protection. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess the applicant's claims of detention, interrogation, beating, and warnings, and consider his credibility, particularly in light of potentially false information provided in a previous visitor visa application and the vagueness of his oral evidence. The Tribunal was also required to consider relevant country information and Departmental guidelines.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not well-founded. It noted that the applicant provided vague and non-responsive answers when questioned about false information provided to the Department. Furthermore, the Tribunal assessed the applicant's level of religious activity and knowledge as limited, and found no supporting evidence for his claims of persecution. The Tribunal also considered that the applicant's family remaining in China had not experienced harm. Applying the relevant country information and guidelines, the Tribunal concluded that there was no real risk of significant harm to the applicant upon return to China, and that he did not meet the criteria for complementary protection.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning the applicant's protection visa application was refused.