2003268 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an application for a protection visa by a Malaysian national. The applicant claimed to have fled Malaysia due to threats from a loan shark to whom he owed a significant sum of money, fearing kidnapping, physical harm, and death. He also alleged that Malaysian police offered no protection, as dealing with money lenders was considered outside their jurisdiction, and that he could not relocate within Malaysia to escape the threat. The decision reviewed was made by the Tribunal.

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 alternatively, under section 36(2)(aa) as a person facing significant harm as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal to Malaysia. This involved determining if the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and if effective protection measures were available in Malaysia.

The Tribunal considered the applicant's claims regarding the loan shark's threats and the lack of state protection. It applied the definitions of "refugee" and "well-founded fear of persecution" as set out in sections 5H and 5J of the Act, respectively. The Tribunal also considered the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which requires a real risk of significant harm, and the exceptions to this risk outlined in section 36(2B), including the availability of reasonable relocation or state protection. After reviewing the evidence and relevant country information, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the criterion in section 36(2)(a).

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