LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback Law Cite

“ Based on all the evidence before the Tribunal, the Tribunal rejects the applicant ’ s claims that he has previously come to the adverse attention of Chinese authorities in relation to his practice of religion or in relation to any actual or imputed political beliefs that might be associated with this practice of religion The Tribunal believes that the applicant ’ s entire account relating to the development of his faith in China and his involvement with the local church [ ] has been contrived, including his introduction to the religion in 2008, his baptism, his claims to have participated in the establishment of two new gatherings in 2009, his claims to have converted family members including his wife, his arrest and detention, the arrest and detention of other congregants and church elders in 2009, the applicant ’ s subsequent inclusion on a black list and the reasons for flight from China on a false passport The Tribunal considers that the applicant has not provided credible evidence in support of these claims In making these findings, the Tribunal has considered the evidence of Mr Poh, which it did find credible, and notice that Mr Poh gave evidence that the applicant had discussed his experiences in China with him several months before the second Tribunal hearing and in the context of Mr Poh providing a further statement to the Tribunal in support of the applicant ’ s case While the Tribunal accepts that those discussions occurred, it does not accept that the applicant having reported an account of his circumstances to Mr Poh provides evidence of any weight in establishing whether that account is true, particularly given the timing and context of the discussions ”     1

Cases Referring to this Case

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court	Jurisdiction	Date †	Full Text		Citation Index
SZRJE v Minister for Immigration	[2012] FMCA 1219	Federal Magistrates Court of Australia	Australia	26 Nov 2012	AustLII