1722781 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant, born in Australia to Malaysian citizen parents, claimed he would face discrimination and political oppression in Malaysia due to his Chinese ethnicity. The applicant asserted that as a non-Muslim Chinese Malaysian, he would be treated as a second-class citizen, facing restrictions on his mother tongue, freedom of religion, and employment opportunities, particularly in public service roles. He also cited his father's experience of being denied a street vendor license due to his ethnicity as evidence of systemic discrimination. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether Australia had protection obligations towards the applicant.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims in light of the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he met the refugee criterion under s 36(2)(a) or the complementary protection criterion under s 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). This involved assessing whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia, the applicant would face a real risk of suffering significant harm. The Tribunal also had regard to Ministerial Direction No. 84 and relevant guidelines and country information.

The Tribunal accepted the applicant's identity as a Malaysian citizen, noting he was born in Australia to Malaysian parents and had provided sufficient documentation. It found that the applicant did not have a right to enter and reside in any country other than Malaysia, meaning s 36(3) of the Act did not apply. After considering the applicant's claims of discrimination based on his Chinese ethnicity and the evidence presented, including his father's experience, the Tribunal concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed. The Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for the grant of a protection visa.