1706362 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection's decision to refuse to grant the applicant, a Malaysian citizen, a protection visa. The applicant initially claimed to fear returning to Malaysia due to political and economic issues, and a death threat related to his opposition to the Malaysian government. Subsequently, the applicant amended his claims to assert a fear of harm based on his atheism and his non-observance of Islamic practices, such as not fasting during Ramadan, drinking alcohol, and engaging in promiscuous behaviour, which he stated were contrary to Syariah law in Malaysia.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the definition of a refugee under section 5H(1) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This involved assessing whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant's removal to Malaysia, he would suffer significant harm. The Tribunal considered the applicant's amended claims regarding his freedom of thought and belief, his alleged atheism, and his non-compliance with Islamic rules, in light of country information pertaining to the enforcement of Syariah law in Malaysia.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were not credible. It noted that the applicant had not openly renounced Islam or disclosed his atheism to his parents or community in Malaysia, instead engaging in practices to avoid detection. The Tribunal also observed that the applicant's initial claims of political persecution were not substantiated, and his amended claims regarding his religious beliefs and practices were not supported by evidence of past harm or a genuine fear of future harm. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated that he would suffer significant harm upon return to Malaysia, and therefore affirmed the delegate's decision to refuse the protection visa.