2318305 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate's decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant, a citizen of Tonga, claimed to disagree with the Tongan government's policies regarding Islam and its relationship with China, asserting a lack of freedom of speech and the potential for arbitrary arrest if she expressed dissenting opinions. The applicant did not provide any further evidence or attend a hearing in support of her application.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention reason under s 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), or alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of her removal to Tonga, she faced a real risk of suffering significant harm under s 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that the onus rests on the applicant to provide sufficient detail to establish the elements of their claim. It noted that the applicant had not provided any evidence beyond her initial application, nor had she attended a hearing to elaborate on her claims. The Tribunal found that the applicant's assertions, including her statement that she had not experienced harm and her vague claims about government control and potential arrest, were not sufficiently detailed or substantiated to satisfy the Tribunal that she faced a real chance of persecution or significant harm upon return to Tonga. The Tribunal applied the principles that an applicant must satisfy the decision-maker of the statutory elements, and that a decision-maker is not required to make the applicant's case for them.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision, finding that the applicant had not met the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.