1718900 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Malaysian citizen, sought review of a decision not to grant him a protection visa. The applicant claimed he left Malaysia due to involvement with a drug gang, fearing retribution from the gang and potential prosecution by authorities. He also expressed concerns about financial penalties and the impact of a criminal record on his future livelihood and ability to travel.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically considering the provisions for complementary protection under section 36(2B) of the Act. This section outlines circumstances where Australia does not have complementary protection obligations, including situations where it would be reasonable for the applicant to relocate within their country of origin, where they could obtain protection from domestic authorities, or where the risk faced is general to the population rather than personal.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines and country information. While the applicant initially stated he was being tracked by a gang and feared for his life, he also indicated he left Malaysia for economic reasons and to escape debt. Crucially, the Tribunal noted that the applicant had abandoned his claim to be at risk from drug dealers. Furthermore, the applicant's evidence suggested that his family, including his parents and brother, remained in Malaysia and that he had previously travelled internationally for work. The Tribunal found no suggestion that the applicant satisfied the criteria under section 36(2) based on family unit membership.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, finding that he did not satisfy the relevant criteria.