1612940 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by two applicants who claimed to fear persecution in Malaysia due to their indebtedness to loan sharks. The applicants asserted that these loan sharks had extensive networks of influence throughout Malaysia, posing a continuing threat. The decision reviewed was made by a delegate who had refused the protection visa application.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicants held a well-founded fear of persecution for the essential and significant reason of membership of a particular social group, namely persons indebted to illegal money lenders in Malaysia, pursuant to sections 5H and 5J(1)(a) of the Act, read with section 36(2)(a). Additionally, the Tribunal was required to consider whether there was a real risk of significant harm to the applicants under complementary protection considerations, pursuant to section 36(2)(aa) of the Act, taking into account the availability of adequate State protection in Malaysia.

The Tribunal noted that the delegate had found the applicants' claims to lack adequate explanation, detail, and supporting evidence, and to be unsupported by relevant country information, leading to a finding that the claims lacked credibility. The delegate also concluded that there was no real risk of significant harm due to the availability of adequate State protection. At the hearings, the Tribunal presented the country information to the applicants, who responded by asserting that Malaysian police only protected the wealthy and that corruption was prevalent. The applicants also referred to a past incident involving red paint and claimed ongoing harassment.