Tribunal: Member Paul Millar
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (the Department) refused to grant the applicant a Protection visa. The applicant requested a review of the decision by the AAT.
The applicant claimed to fear harm from the political party in power if he returned to Bangladesh because he was a supporter of an opposing political party. He claimed this affected him in various ways and that he had already been attacked on one occasion because of his involvement with the party in opposition.
Australia has an obligation under the Migration Act 1958 to protect individuals who satisfy one of two criteria. The first is called the ‘refugee criterion’ and broadly requires the applicant to have a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’. The second is called ‘complementary protection’ grounds and broadly requires that there is ‘a real risk of significant harm’ to the applicant.
The AAT was concerned with the applicant’s credibility noting he had given inconsistent evidence about various incidents. The AAT also noted the applicant delayed his departure from Bangladesh and his application for a Protection visa by significant periods. The AAT did not find the applicant’s explanations for those concerns satisfactory and concluded that the applicant was not a witness of truth. The AAT continued to consider whether the applicant satisfied either of the criteria for a Protection visa. The AAT accepted that the applicant had some involvement in the opposing political party when he was a student and that his father was involved with the party.
However, without credible evidence to support the claimed extent of his involvement in the opposition party or his claim that the Bangladeshi government held any adverse interest in him, and having regard to relevant country information, the AAT concluded the applicant did not satisfy either grounds for a Protection visa. The AAT affirmed the Department’s decision to refuse to grant the Protection visa.
Read the full decision on AustLII.