1620988 (Refugee)

The applicants, citizens of Malaysia, sought protection visas in Australia. Their claims were based on allegations that the first applicant, a Christian convert from Islam, had been interrogated and harassed by religious authorities in Malaysia. This harassment allegedly stemmed from his teaching of Bible studies to a Muslim friend who subsequently adopted Christianity. The applicants feared persecution and harm if returned to Malaysia, asserting that the Malaysian authorities would not protect them.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether any of the applicants possessed a well-founded fear of persecution for one of the five prescribed reasons under section 5J(1) of the Migration Act 1958, or, alternatively, whether there were substantial grounds to believe that their removal to Malaysia would result in a real risk of significant harm. The Tribunal was required to consider the applicants' claims in light of relevant country information and policy guidelines, and to assess the credibility and consistency of the evidence presented.

The Tribunal considered the applicants' claims that they feared persecution due to religious conversion and the alleged actions of religious authorities. However, the Tribunal found the evidence presented to be vague and inconsistent, and it was not satisfied that the applicants had established a well-founded fear of persecution. Crucially, the Tribunal applied section 36(2B)(b) of the Act, which provides that there is not taken to be a real risk of significant harm if the applicant could obtain protection from an authority of the country. Based on the evidence before it, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Australia owed protection obligations to the applicants.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicants protection visas, finding that they did not satisfy the criteria set out in section 36(2)(a) or (aa) of the Act, nor the subsequent criteria under section 36(2)(b) or (c).