1515542 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of an applicant seeking review of a delegate's decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant claimed to have left his country of origin because his former boss, a wealthy and powerful individual named [Mr A], wanted to kill him. The applicant alleged he had been involved in illegal activities at his former boss's behest, attempted to quit, fled to Kuala Lumpur, was found, beaten, and his family was threatened. He expressed fear of death upon return, believing authorities in his country were corrupt and unable to protect him.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, or alternatively, the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). This involved determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and if effective protection measures were available in his receiving country, Malaysia. The Tribunal also had to assess the applicant's credibility regarding his claims.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be a national of Malaysia and that Malaysia was his receiving country. However, the Tribunal found the applicant not to be a witness of truth, noting inconsistencies and a lack of knowledge regarding the claims made in his visa application. The Tribunal considered the delegate's assessment that Malaysian authorities, including the Royal Malaysia Police, were reasonably effective in combating organised crime and protecting individuals. Based on the information before it, the delegate had concluded that the applicant could receive effective protection from the Malaysian authorities against threats from [Mr A]. The Tribunal's assessment of the applicant's credibility led it to conclude that he had not established a well-founded fear of persecution.

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