2403151 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning a protection visa application made by a single Catholic woman from Dili, Timor-Leste. The applicant claimed she came to Australia to work, experienced issues with her employer, and left to find lawful work. She stated she would face unemployment if she returned to Timor-Leste and wished to remain in Australia to support herself and her family. Crucially, she answered "no" to questions regarding experiencing harm in Timor-Leste or fearing harm if she returned.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958, specifically whether she was a refugee or a person in respect of whom Australia had protection obligations due to a real risk of significant harm upon removal. The Tribunal was also required to consider the applicant's consent to proceed to a decision without a hearing, despite the Tribunal's invitation to provide oral evidence and arguments.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to establish a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm. It emphasised that the onus is on the applicant to specify all particulars of their claim and provide sufficient evidence, and that a decision-maker is not obliged to make the applicant's case for them. Given the applicant's explicit denial of fearing harm and her consent to proceed without a hearing, the Tribunal determined the matter based on the available evidence. The Tribunal noted that economic hardship alone, or the preference to support family in Australia, did not satisfy the criteria for protection.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that she did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the Migration Act 1958.