1622092 (Refugee)

This decision concerns an application for a protection visa by an applicant who claimed to fear returning to Malaysia due to political activities, including writing and delivering a speech. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was tasked with determining whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's claims regarding his political activities and the resulting fear of persecution were credible, and whether he had established a well-founded fear of serious harm as defined by sections 5J(4) and 5J(5) of the relevant legislation. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess whether the applicant's race (Chinese Malay) would expose him to a real chance of serious harm, or if the Malaysian police were unwilling to protect Chinese Malaysians.

The Tribunal found the applicant's evidence to be lacking in credibility. It noted inconsistencies in his account, such as his initial vagueness about why he fled Australia and his assertion of living at only one address prior to departure, which contradicted his claim of going into hiding after delivering a speech. Furthermore, the Tribunal discovered significant portions of the alleged speech online, attributed to another individual and dated prior to the applicant's claimed delivery. This led the Tribunal to conclude that the applicant did not write the speech or hold the views expressed within it, nor did he participate in the protest or face the alleged police pursuit. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution based on his race, political opinion, or any other protected ground. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.