1928473 (Refugee)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for a protection visa made by an applicant who sought to avoid return to Malaysia. The applicant's claims for protection were primarily based on economic hardship, difficulties in finding employment, and concerns related to family medical expenses, physical assault, and threats from criminals.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the definition of a refugee under subsection 5J(1)(a) of the Act, specifically whether the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider whether there were substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of the applicant's removal, there was a real risk of significant harm, pursuant to section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's claims were predominantly based on economic grounds, including the desire for better economic conditions and earnings in Australia and the fear of economic hardship and difficulty in finding employment upon return to Malaysia. The Tribunal concluded that these claims did not fall within the defined reasons for persecution under the Refugee Convention and that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate a well-founded fear of persecution. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant met the refugee criterion. Furthermore, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds for believing there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal, as the applicant's claims did not demonstrate either a real risk or significant harm as defined by the Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) or section 36(2)(aa) of the Act.