Immigration asked asylum-seeker to 'reconsider his position on telling the truth'

An asylum seeker says Immigration New Zealand revealed his name and details to his ex-wife in Sri Lanka. Photo: 123RF

An asylum seeker says he fears for his life after his name and details were revealed by Immigration New Zealand to his ex-wife in Sri Lanka.

He claims Immigration (INZ) authorities were punishing him for "refusing to lie" in an investigation into an interpreter. INZ says it carried out due diligence before approaching her.

The probe was dropped and the Immigration and Protection Tribunal found the interpreter had not fabricated asylum claims. It pointed out the investigation's witness was a man who had falsely given evidence in another case, as well as making up an asylum claim for himself.

RNZ has seen emails between the asylum seeker and the investigator, where he was asked to take part in the investigation, including to explore "possible visa pathways that may be open to you" and telling him "you must understand the seriousness of the situation you now find yourself in".

The man replied that he never expected anything except the interpreter's genuine help with translations. The investigator asked him to "reconsider his position on telling the truth" and went on to talk about his claim, which at that point had not been decided.

"It does not take a genius to work out that your chance of being successful with the claim are extremely unlikely," he wrote. "If you are unsuccessful you will not be able to apply for any other kind of visa whilst in NZ."

In reply the asylum seeker said he knew nothing about made-up stories. "I feel like you are joking about my life," he wrote. "That's my real life story...I feel like you're bullying me and my asylum claim threatening me to get something you want your way. [I'm] not a person who wants to be treated like this or put pressure on any more which I can't absorb."

The man's claim was rejected, and on appeal the tribunal also did not believe his version of events, after the man's former wife said her family had no connections to a criminal politician.

It is illegal to reveal asylum claimants' details in most circumstances.

"The tribunal notes that decisions made by investigators attached to Immigration New Zealand to contact persons named in refugee claims as agents of persecution, let alone before that claim has been determined by the Refugee Status Unit, is a strategy fraught with risk in terms of creating potential grounds for recognition as a refugee or protected person where none might otherwise exist.

"It is not within the tribunal's jurisdiction to determine the legality of this decision which is limited to determining how such disclosure impacts risk to the appellant, if at all. There is no doubt, however, that [the investigator] has made the fact that the appellant has lodged a refugee claim in New Zealand, and the broad outline of that claim, known to the second wife.

"This is of no idle concern in the present case as the country information filed ... in support of the appeal establishes that [the politician] is implicated in corruption and politically motivated violence."

Harassment

The man said his former wife, who had returned to Sri Lanka, had told her father and the politician about his refugee claim which centred on a bigamous marriage he said he was forced into.

He alleged his mother had been harassed by the politician's "thugs" and he feared for his safety if he was sent back there.

He has had subsequent work visas rejected for an ongoing job as a support worker, and deporting him was "retaliation" for not going along with the investigator's version of events, he told RNZ.

"If I leave, it will be because I was pushed out by a broken process that punished me for telling the truth. No one should be penalised for refusing to lie, especially not someone seeking protection from persecution.

"I was pressured to give false testimony to help build a case against someone else. When I refused, I became the target. This is not a fair investigation - it's intimidation."

It was a serious breach of confidentiality, he added.

"I have done nothing wrong. My asylum claim is real. I fled a life-threatening situation in Sri Lanka, and instead of receiving protection, I was targeted, pressured, and punished for standing by the truth."

'Minimal risk' - Immigration

Immigration compliance and investigations general manager Steve Watson told RNZ it took its legal requirements seriously.

"In this instance, the investigator undertook due diligence before contacting [the man's] ex-wife to ensure they were acting within the law. This included getting specialist advice from the Refugee Status Unit. After careful review, it was considered that the line of enquiry was lawful and there would be minimal risk of endangering [him] by speaking to his ex-wife.

"Any previous asylum claimant is able make a subsequent claim for refugee or protection status."

He said INZ had also declined his accredited employer work visa because of concerns that he would stay in New Zealand without a valid visa once it expired, and that he would not provide a police certificate. Subsequent appeals for visas were rejected because a deportation order had been issued.

The man said it would put him in danger if he contacted Sri Lankan authorities to obtain a police certificate, but he had instead submitted a statutory declaration.

"Now I don't know where to go," he said. "Legal advice is very costly. I can't afford it as I don't have an income. No way to save my life."

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.