2319203 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision by the Refugee Tribunal affirming the refusal to grant him a protection visa. The dispute concerned whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee or under complementary protection obligations. The applicant claimed to have borrowed a significant sum of money in Timor-Leste and received death threats due to his inability to pay the interest and capital. He asserted that his family, police, and local politicians had avoided him, and he had no relatives in other parts of Timor-Leste to seek refuge.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution in Timor-Leste for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), and if not, whether there were substantial grounds for believing that his removal from Australia to Timor-Leste would pose a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal was required to consider the applicant's claims of debt, threats, and his inability to obtain assistance or protection within Timor-Leste, as well as the general economic conditions and the availability of state protection.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's written application and his evidence provided at the hearing. It noted inconsistencies in his claims and the lack of specificity regarding the identity of those threatening him and the exact amount of the debt. The Tribunal also took into account Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines. Ultimately, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for being a refugee. Furthermore, it concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the complementary protection criterion, as there was no suggestion he was a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.