1905904 (Refugee)

This matter concerned a protection visa application by a Malaysian citizen who claimed he feared returning to Malaysia due to poor economic conditions and his inability to find suitable employment. He also raised concerns about potential harm from a loan shark to whom he owed money. The applicant arrived in Australia in December 2015 and applied for a protection visa in December 2016.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa, specifically whether he would face persecution or significant harm upon return to Malaysia. This involved assessing whether his fear of economic hardship constituted a well-founded fear of persecution based on his race, membership of a particular social group, or other protected grounds, and whether he would be denied effective protection by the Malaysian authorities. The court also considered the complementary protection criterion, which requires a real risk of significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal.

The Tribunal, while accepting the applicant's claims regarding loan shark harassment and his membership in the particular social group of individuals indebted to loan sharks, ultimately found that he would have access to effective protection from the Royal Malaysian Police. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant could realise the value of his property in Malaysia, which exceeded his outstanding debts, thereby mitigating the risk of harm. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant's claims did not satisfy the refugee or complementary protection criteria. The court affirmed the Tribunal's decision.