2113820 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking a protection visa, who claimed to fear harm from environmental pollution in China. The applicant alleged that his complaints to the environmental administration department were ignored and that relocation within China was not a viable option due to widespread pollution. The Tribunal was required to determine whether there was a real chance the applicant would be persecuted on return to China, or, alternatively, whether there was a real risk he would suffer significant harm if removed from Australia.

The Tribunal applied the principles outlined in section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires an applicant to demonstrate they are a refugee or, alternatively, that Australia has protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm upon removal. The Tribunal noted that it is the applicant's responsibility to specify the particulars of their claim and provide sufficient evidence, and that the Tribunal is not obligated to assist in establishing the claim. The applicant had provided limited information and failed to attend a hearing offered to allow for further clarification of his claims regarding his health concerns, the severity of pollution in China, and the lack of effective remedies.

Given the applicant's failure to provide further information or attend the hearing, the Tribunal found that the material before it was insufficient to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.