1613390 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Malaysian national of Indian Muslim ethnicity, sought a protection visa. The dispute centred on his claims of being threatened and harassed by a gang known as the 'Tiga-Lions' and experiencing a lack of protection from the Malaysian police due to his ethnicity. He also asserted that as an Indian Muslim, he felt he did not belong in Malaysia and faced difficulties accessing support from relevant organisations. The case was heard by Paul Windsor, a Member of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958, which requires a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and whether he met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which requires substantial grounds for believing that removal would result in a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal was required to assess the credibility of the applicant's evidence in light of country information and his own statements.

The Tribunal's reasoning involved a detailed examination of the applicant's claims against available country information regarding gangs, police effectiveness, and the treatment of ethnic minorities in Malaysia. It found inconsistencies between the applicant's written statements and his oral evidence regarding the police's actions and the extent of gang activity affecting him. The Tribunal noted that while gangs exist and can pose a threat, the country information suggested measures were in place to address them and that the Royal Malaysia Police were generally considered professional. Furthermore, the Tribunal found the applicant's claim of not belonging as an Indian Muslim unconvincing, noting the existence of a dedicated organisation, KIMMA, for the Malaysian Indian Muslim community, which the applicant could have approached for support. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not established a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not satisfy the criteria under either section 36(2)(a) or section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958.