2008193 (Refugee)

The applicant, a Malaysian citizen, sought a protection visa in Australia. The dispute arose because the applicant claimed he left Malaysia due to economic factors and high living costs, fearing he would be unable to find suitable employment and support his family upon return. The Department assessed his claims on the basis of his Malaysian nationality. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under either the "refugee" criterion or the "complementary protection" criterion.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine if the applicant qualified as a refugee under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth), which requires a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion. Alternatively, the Tribunal considered whether the applicant met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa), which applies if there are substantial grounds for believing that, as a necessary and foreseeable consequence of removal from Australia, there is a real risk of suffering significant harm.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's stated reasons for leaving Malaysia were solely economic. The applicant himself agreed that the economic harm he feared would not be directed at him for any of the reasons specified in the refugee definition. He did not suggest any person or group would seek to harm him upon return to Malaysia. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution as defined by the Act. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no evidence to suggest he would suffer significant harm as contemplated by the complementary protection criterion.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to grant the applicant a protection visa, as he failed to satisfy the criteria under section 36(2) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).