1601554 (Refugee)

The applicant sought review of a decision by the delegate of the Minister to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed she left Malaysia due to issues involving a politician who allegedly demanded she change her religion to Muslim and threatened to misuse her situation. She feared persecution if returned to Malaysia, specifically that her religion would be forcibly changed. The delegate had refused the visa, finding no proof of her claims, that country information suggested Buddhists did not typically face discrimination in Malaysia, and that Malaysian authorities could provide adequate protection.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) (the Act), which concerns a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider the "complementary protection criterion" under section 36(2)(aa) of the Act, which applies if there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to a receiving country, the applicant faces a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be a national of Malaysia, making Malaysia her receiving country. However, the Tribunal found the applicant not to be a witness of truth, noting significant discrepancies between her oral evidence and her written claims, as well as inconsistencies in her testimony during the hearing. Due to this lack of credibility regarding critical aspects of her claims, the Tribunal was not satisfied that she had a well-founded fear of persecution or faced a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal also considered Ministerial Direction No. 56 and relevant policy guidelines and country information.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the delegate's decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.