1904939 (Refugee)

The applicant, a woman from Malaysia, sought review of the decision to refuse her protection visa. She claimed to have left Malaysia due to significant debt, which caused her stress and led to her planning suicide. She also alleged harm from those to whom she owed money, who pressured her for repayment. The applicant contended that her life would be worse upon return, requiring her to work multiple jobs to survive and repay her debts.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, either as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Migration Act 1958 or under the complementary protection provisions in section 36(2)(aa). This required determining if she held a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, or if there was a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were general and lacked the necessary detail and context regarding her alleged debts, the nature of the harm experienced, and the perpetrators. Crucially, the applicant declined an invitation to a hearing where these matters could have been explored. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant had established the factual basis of her claims, including the existence of debts, harm suffered, or suicidal ideation as a result. The Tribunal also considered the complementary protection criterion, which requires substantial grounds for believing there is a real risk of significant harm. Given the lack of evidence, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not face a real chance of serious harm from anyone due to past borrowing or outstanding debts upon return to Malaysia.

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