1905722 (Refugee)

This case concerned an application for a Protection visa by a Malaysian citizen who arrived in Australia in August 2018. The applicant claimed to be a single Malay Muslim woman from Selangor who had left Malaysia due to significant financial debts, including loans from family and a bank, and the downturn of her online business. She also alleged threats from two ex-husbands and family responsibilities, including caring for her parents and siblings, and stated she had experienced discrimination at work and suffered mental health issues. The decision under review affirmed the refusal to grant the visa.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant met the criteria for a Protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) as a refugee, or under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia. The court was required to consider the applicant's claims of persecution, significant harm, and the availability of protection in Malaysia, taking into account the Refugee Law Guidelines, Complementary Protection Guidelines, and country information.

The court accepted that Malaysia was the applicant's receiving country. However, it found that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion for being a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the Act, nor did she satisfy the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa). The court's reasoning, while not explicitly detailed for each claim, implicitly determined that the circumstances described by the applicant did not amount to a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of significant harm as defined by the Act. Specifically, the court noted there was no suggestion that the applicant satisfied the criteria as a member of the same family unit as a person who held a protection visa.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa.