SZMZV v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

In this appeal, the applicants, citizens of Malaysia, challenged the refusal of their application for a protection visa by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship. The applicants, comprising a Hindu woman and her Christian partner, argued that they faced persecution from the woman’s family due to their inter-faith relationship and refusal to comply with familial pressures to marry within their respective religions and castes. Their application was initially declined by a delegate of the Minister and subsequently upheld by the Tribunal on review. The applicants contended that the Tribunal erred in concluding that they would receive adequate state protection and that it would be reasonable for them to relocate within Malaysia.

The primary legal issues for the court were whether the Tribunal correctly assessed the availability of state protection and the reasonableness of relocation within Malaysia. The court had to consider whether the Tribunal appropriately interpreted the relevant provisions of the Migration Act and the Refugee Convention. Specifically, it needed to determine if the Tribunal correctly assessed the likelihood of state protection against the family’s persecution and if it was reasonable for the applicants to move to another part of Malaysia.

The court found that the Tribunal’s reasoning and decision were sound. It held that the Tribunal did not err in concluding that the applicants would receive adequate state protection. The court noted that the applicants did not seek help from the Malaysian authorities, and there was no evidence suggesting the authorities were unwilling or unable to provide protection. Furthermore, the court found no fault in the Tribunal’s determination that it would be reasonable for the applicants to relocate within Malaysia, given the lack of evidence showing that relocation would not be a viable option. The court thus upheld the Tribunal’s decision, affirming that the applicants’ claims for protection did not meet the necessary thresholds under the Migration Act and the Refugee Convention.

ORDERS:
1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The applicants are to pay the Minister’s costs.