1609913 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an appeal by a minor applicant, who was a national of Malaysia, against a decision to refuse his application for a protection visa. The applicant's claims centred on the alleged harassment and threats by loan sharks against his father, which subsequently extended to his mother, forcing the family to flee Malaysia. The applicant argued that the Malaysian police were unable or unwilling to provide protection due to corruption.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under s.5J of the Act in Malaysia. Alternatively, the Tribunal had to consider whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant's removal to Malaysia, there was a real risk that he would suffer significant harm, pursuant to the complementary protection criterion under s.36(2)(aa).

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of Ministerial Direction No. 56 and relevant departmental guidelines and country information. It found that the applicant had not demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had not indicated whether he could relocate within Malaysia, a factor relevant to assessing the risk of significant harm. The Tribunal also observed that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in s.36(2) by being a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.