1612652 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Malaysian national, sought review of a decision by the Refugee Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) to affirm the refusal of his protection visa application. The applicant claimed he feared persecution in Malaysia due to his marriage to a woman who had converted from Islam to Christianity to marry him. He alleged threats of harm from the Muslim community and intervention by the Islamic Department, asserting that his wife's conversion and practice of Christianity made her a target, and that they could not find safety within Malaysia.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had erred in finding that the applicant did not meet the criteria for a protection visa. This involved assessing the applicant's claims of persecution, the credibility of his account, and whether he faced a real risk of significant harm upon return to Malaysia, as defined by the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth). The court was required to consider the Tribunal's application of relevant policy guidelines and country information, as well as the legal principles concerning well-founded fear of persecution and the availability of effective protection measures.

The Tribunal, in its decision, found the applicant to be a citizen of Malaysia and noted the absence of evidence suggesting he could access protection in a safe third country. While acknowledging the importance of a reasonable approach to credibility assessment, the Tribunal ultimately did not find the applicant's claims to be sufficiently substantiated to meet the refugee criterion under s.36(2)(a) of the Act. The Tribunal's reasoning, informed by Ministerial Direction No. 56 and departmental guidelines, led to the conclusion that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.

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