New Zealand Tribunal Rejects 40 Khalistan-linked Asylum Claims

New Zealand’s Immigration and Protection Tribunal has rejected all 40 published asylum cases linked to support for Khalistan that it considered during 2025 and 2026, signalling a notable change from 2024, when two applicants succeeded in securing refugee status on similar grounds.

A review of published tribunal rulings shows that 15 such claims were decided in 2025 and another 25 in 2026. None of the applicants was recognised as a refugee.

The recent run of decisions assumes significance because the tribunal had accepted two Khalistan-related claims in 2024. In those cases, Indian nationals were granted refugee status after the tribunal concluded that the nature and visibility of their political activities could expose them to persecution upon return to India.

The successful cases, however, involved applicants with comparatively prominent political profiles. Their activities included sustained public advocacy for Khalistan on social media and links with separatist organisations. One of the applicants also had a conspicuous tattoo associated with the Khalistan movement.

Subsequent applicants have attempted to rely on those rulings as precedents. Reports by Awaaz and The Australia Today said lawyers referred to one or both of the successful 2024 cases in at least nine later proceedings. Those claims were nevertheless rejected.

The tribunal’s more recent rulings have drawn a distinction between publicly expressing support for Khalistan and establishing that such activity creates a genuine risk of persecution.

A recurring issue in the rejected cases has been the relatively limited nature of the applicants’ political involvement. The tribunal has also questioned whether there was sufficient evidence to establish that Indian authorities knew about, or had taken an interest in, their activities abroad.

One applicant, for instance, had participated in a non-binding Khalistan referendum in Auckland and joined a demonstration outside the Indian High Commission in Wellington. The tribunal characterised the activities as “low level” and found no evidence that they had brought the individual to the attention of authorities in India.

Taken together, the rulings suggest that merely identifying with or expressing support for the Khalistan cause does not, by itself, satisfy the legal threshold for refugee protection in New Zealand.

Instead, applicants are required to establish circumstances specific to their own case and demonstrate a credible risk that they would face persecution if returned to India. Factors such as the extent and visibility of political activity, links with organisations, public exposure and evidence of interest from Indian authorities can therefore become important in the tribunal’s assessment.

The 40 unsuccessful published decisions over 2025 and 2026 stand in sharp contrast to the two successful cases from 2024 and indicate a more demanding evidentiary threshold for applicants whose political involvement is comparatively limited.

The overall number of asylum applications involving Khalistan-related claims, however, cannot be determined from official statistics.

Immigration New Zealand does not categorise publicly available asylum data according to the particular political or other grounds invoked by applicants. According to an INZ spokesperson quoted by Awaaz, relevant information may be contained in individual case files but is not maintained in a format that can readily be extracted for statistical reporting.

The published tribunal rulings therefore provide only a picture of cases that have reached the tribunal and been made publicly available, rather than a comprehensive count of all Khalistan-related asylum applications lodged in New Zealand.