Australian Human Rights Commission Submission to UN Committee Against Torture, 17 October 2014 inconsistent with those obligations. Further, the rules of natural justice would not apply to the exercise of these powers. This means that there would be no obligation to ask asylum seekers questions about whether they had a wellfounded fear of persecution in any country that they might be taken to. (d) Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014 (Cth) 216. On 25 June 2014 the Australian Government introduced the Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014 (Cth) into Parliament. 217. The Bill modifies the threshold test for determining Australia’s protection obligations, including under the CAT.134 Under the new test, the Minister can only be satisfied that Australia has protection obligations in respect of a noncitizen if the Minister considers that it ‘is more likely than not’ that the noncitizen will suffer harm if removed from Australia to a receiving country.135 218. In addition, the Bill amends the Migration Act to: 219. • Make clear that it is an asylum seeker’s responsibility to specify the particulars of their claim and to provide sufficient evidence to establish their claims for protection. • Provide for the Refugee Review Tribunal to draw an unfavourable inference in relation to credibility of claims or evidence that are raised by an asylum seeker at the review stage for the very first time, if there is no reasonable explanation for the failure to raise the claims and evidence before the primary decision maker. • Create grounds for refusal of a protection visa application when an applicant refuses or fails to prove their identity, nationality or citizenship, and does not have a reasonable explanation for doing so, including where the applicant provides bogus documents or destroys/discards such evidence. • Provide that a protection visa will not be granted to a family member of a protection visa holder unless the family member applied for the protection visa before the protection visa holder was granted their visa.136 The Commission notes that the PJCHR has stated that several of the proposals contained in the bill are incompatible with Australia’s nonrefoulement obligations.137 49