2110995 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant, a national of Timor-Leste, claimed he could not return to his home country due to significant debt and the resulting fear of imprisonment. He stated that he needed to remain in Australia to earn money to support his family. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the visa.

The primary legal issue before the AAT was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as defined by section 5J of the Act, or if he faced substantial grounds for believing he would suffer significant harm as a consequence of removal from Australia.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's evidence, including his written claims and oral testimony. The applicant admitted that his initial claim of owing a lot of money and fearing prison in Timor-Leste may have been fabricated by the person who assisted him with his visa application. He stated that there was no conflict in Timor-Leste, but rather a lack of work opportunities. The Tribunal noted that the applicant did not provide evidence of persecution for any of the prescribed reasons. Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate that he would suffer significant harm upon return to Timor-Leste, nor did he establish that he was unable to avail himself of the protection of his country. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act, nor as a member of a family unit under section 36(2)(b) or (c).

The Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.