Dba17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

This matter concerned an application for judicial review of a decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) which affirmed a delegate's decision to refuse the applicant a protection visa. The applicant, an Indian Malaysian, claimed he had a well-founded fear of persecution due to his political involvement and discrimination. The Tribunal had made adverse credibility findings regarding the applicant's claims of political rallies, arrest, torture, and threats, and concluded that any discrimination he might face as a Tamil would not amount to serious harm.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the Tribunal committed jurisdictional error by failing to provide "clear particulars" as required by section 424AA of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) regarding inconsistencies in the applicant's evidence, and by failing to advise the applicant of his right to seek additional time to respond. Additionally, the Court considered whether the Tribunal erred by failing to consider the correct Particular Social Group (PSG) to which the applicant belonged, specifically including his status as a "failed asylum seeker" who had criticised the Malaysian government and police.

The Court found that the Tribunal's adverse credibility findings were open to it, given the inconsistencies in the applicant's accounts and his limited knowledge of relevant organisations, and that the applicant's disagreement with these findings did not establish error. The Court also determined that the applicant's submissions invited an impermissible merits review and that no jurisdictional error arose from his oral submissions. The Court noted that the applicant had not filed amended applications, affidavit evidence, or submissions despite opportunities to do so, and that recent events in Malaysia were not relevant to the review of the Tribunal's decision.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.