2303599 (Migration)

The applicant, who held a Bridging E (Class WE) visa granted in conjunction with an application for a protection visa, sought judicial review of a decision to affirm the refusal of that protection visa. The applicant had acquired criminal convictions and served a period of imprisonment. The core of the dispute concerned the applicant's claim for protection based on alleged conversion to Christianity and participation in a house church, and the assessment of whether there was a real chance of harm if returned to their country of origin. The matter came before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine whether the decision-maker had erred in finding that the applicant did not hold a genuine fear of persecution, and consequently, whether the decision to refuse the protection visa was affected by jurisdictional error. Specifically, the court had to consider the weight and reliability of the evidence presented by the applicant regarding their religious conversion and participation, and whether this evidence, when considered against available country information, established a real chance of harm amounting to persecution under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

In reaching its decision, the court examined the applicant's evidence of religious conversion and participation, noting that it was described as "unofficial" and lacking "open expression." The court found the evidence of membership and participation to be vague and unsubstantiated, particularly in light of the applicant's criminal history and imprisonment. The court considered the written and oral supporting statements provided by the applicant, alongside country information, and concluded that there was no real chance of the applicant suffering harm amounting to persecution if returned to their country of origin. The decision under review was therefore affirmed.