2015992 (Refugee)

This matter concerned an appeal by an applicant against the refusal of a protection visa. The applicant, a Malaysian citizen, claimed to have fled his home country due to persecution and harassment of his family by the government, including the forced sale of their land and physical assault of his father. The applicant also claimed he would face destitution and mistreatment if returned to Malaysia due to alleged corruption and a lack of human rights.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant met the criteria for a protection visa under section 36(2)(a) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) by establishing a well-founded fear of persecution in Malaysia, and alternatively, whether he met the complementary protection criterion under section 36(2)(aa) by demonstrating a real risk of significant harm as a consequence of removal. The Tribunal was required to assess the applicant's credibility, considering inconsistencies in his statements, his delay in applying for protection, and his criminal history and imprisonment in Australia.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be an untruthful witness, concluding that his claims for protection were fabricated to secure a migration outcome. This conclusion was based on significant inconsistencies in his evidence, including his initial denial of any criminal convictions despite having been imprisoned, and his explanation for the delay in applying for a protection visa. The Tribunal found that the applicant deliberately provided false or misleading information and was prepared to be dishonest to achieve his migration goals. Consequently, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant had a genuine fear of harm in Malaysia, nor that there was a real risk of significant harm upon removal.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visa, finding that the applicant did not meet the criteria under either section 36(2)(a) or section 36(2)(aa) of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth).