1906544 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision to refuse a protection visa. The applicant, a national of Malaysia, arrived in Australia in October 2018 and subsequently applied for a protection visa, which was refused by the Department. The applicant's claims for protection were based on economic hardship in Malaysia, stating he was from a poor family, could not secure employment, and believed Malaysian authorities could not protect him due to his poverty. The Tribunal was required to determine whether Australia had protection obligations in respect to the applicant.

The Tribunal was required to consider the applicant's claims under sections 36(2)(a) and 36(2)(aa) of the Act, which relate to refugee and complementary protection criteria respectively. The central legal issue was whether the applicant had provided sufficient particulars and evidence to establish that Australia owed him protection obligations. The Tribunal noted that section 5AAA of the Act places the onus on the applicant to specify all particulars of their claim and provide sufficient evidence to establish it, and that the Tribunal has no obligation to establish or assist in establishing the claim.

The Tribunal found the applicant's claims to be vague and lacking in detail. It noted that the applicant did not attend the hearing, despite being advised that the material before the Tribunal was insufficient for a favourable decision. The Tribunal indicated that had the applicant attended, it would have sought elaboration on the reasons for his departure from Malaysia due to economic hardship, the nature of his family's poverty, and whether these economic problems stemmed from differential treatment based on race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had failed to establish his claim and therefore affirmed the decision under review.