1604761 (Refugee)

The applicants, a married couple of Malaysian nationals, sought review of a decision to refuse their protection visas. They claimed that their families did not approve of their marriage and would threaten to separate them upon their return to Malaysia. The applicants also stated they had been misled into applying for protection visas, having intended to seek student visas.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicants held a well-founded fear of persecution or faced a real risk of significant harm if returned to Malaysia, thereby satisfying the criteria for a protection visa under sections 36(2)(a) and 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The Tribunal was required to consider the applicants' claims in light of relevant policy guidelines and country information, and to determine if any fear of harm was genuine and if effective protection measures were available in Malaysia.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the applicants' families initially disapproved of their marriage, the husband's family had since accepted it, and the wife could rely on the support of her in-laws. Consequently, the Tribunal was satisfied that neither applicant genuinely feared harm upon return to Malaysia. The Tribunal also noted the applicants' stated intention to pursue student visas, further undermining their claims for protection. Applying the principles of sections 5J and 36(2A) of the Act, the Tribunal concluded that the applicants did not have a well-founded fear of persecution and did not face a real risk of significant harm.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants protection visas, finding they did not satisfy the criteria under section 36(2)(a) or (aa), nor consequently, sections 36(2)(b) or (c).