1706794 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Malaysian national who had become an unlawful non-citizen in Australia after his Electronic Travel Authority visa expired. The applicant sought to establish that he met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee or under the complementary protection provisions. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility and whether his claims, if accepted, fulfilled the requirements for protection.

The central legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, as defined by section 5J of the Migration Act 1958, or whether he faced a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, as contemplated by section 36(2)(aa) of the Act. The Tribunal also considered the applicant's claims regarding economic hardship and discrimination due to disability in Malaysia, and whether these constituted grounds for protection.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's stated reasons for leaving Malaysia and his fears upon return were primarily related to economic difficulties and the inability to secure employment due to his disability, rather than a well-founded fear of persecution. The applicant explicitly stated he was not seeking safety and was not being harmed, but rather could not continue living due to a lack of income. He also indicated that authorities would not help him due to financial problems, and that many Malaysians faced similar issues. The Tribunal concluded that these circumstances did not meet the threshold for a well-founded fear of persecution or significant harm under the Act, particularly as the applicant did not claim to be personally targeted or that the risk was not faced by the population generally.

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