1824779 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of a Malaysian national seeking a protection visa. The applicant claimed to have been involved in an investment scheme that failed, leading to threats and physical harm from other investors who blamed him for their financial losses. He expressed a fear of being killed if returned to Malaysia due to these unresolved issues.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either under the 'refugee' criterion or on 'complementary protection' grounds. This required determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution or if there were substantial grounds for believing he would suffer significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia. The Tribunal also considered the relevant guidelines and country information provided by government departments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa. While acknowledging the applicant's claims regarding the failed investment scheme and the threats he received, the Tribunal concluded that these circumstances did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, nor did they meet the threshold for significant harm under the complementary protection provisions. The Tribunal noted that the applicant had not demonstrated that he would face a real risk of significant harm that was not faced by the population generally or that he could not reasonably relocate within Malaysia to avoid such a risk.

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