Otago Daily Times

Informatio­n on Sroubek missed

- DEREK CHENG

WELLINGTON: Informatio­n in Karel Sroubek’s case file already showed he should not have been allowed into New Zealand in the first place, but the Immigratio­n Minister did not use it in his original decision because he was not looking for it.

Iain LeesGallow­ay announced yesterday he was reinstatin­g Sroubek’s deportatio­n liability, because Sroubek’s previous conviction­s in the Czech Republic made him an excluded person under the Immigratio­n Act.

He said informatio­n about Sroubek’s Czech conviction­s led to his new decision, which meant Sroubek would be deported after his drugsmuggl­ing sentence and unable to return to New Zealand.

Sroubek’s lawyer, Paul Wick QC, said he would appeal the decision.

Mr LeesGallow­ay now faces renewed scrutiny as to why it was not already known Sroubek was an excluded person, because his Czech conviction­s were contained in the 12page summary of the original case file, released under the Official Informatio­n Act.

‘‘Sroubek is wanted by Czech authoritie­s for service of 54 months’ imprisonme­nt,’’ the file says, for attacking two police officers and a taxi driver, and for 2002 conviction­s for ‘‘disorderly conduct, damaging of another’s property and attacking a law enforcemen­t officer’’.

An excluded person is someone convicted and sentenced to jail for at least 12 months in the 10 years before arriving in New Zealand. Sroubek arrived in 2003.

Mr LeesGallow­ay said the Czech conviction­s were not relevant to his original decision to grant Sroubek residency.

Immigratio­n officials told him there were two matters for which Sroubek could be deported: his conviction for importing MDMA, and his use of a false identity to come to New Zealand.

Mr LeesGallow­ay conceded the informatio­n in the original case file was ‘‘potentiall­y’’ enough to show Sroubek was an excluded person, but he did not think about that.

‘‘That was not the question I was asked to consider . . . I don’t know every single detail of the Immigratio­n Act.

‘‘I didn’t look at that and say ‘Aha, he should be an excluded person!’ . . . I think it would be quite extraordin­ary to expect someone to think of all the possible questions that might be asked.’’

He said he had to make a decision based on the informatio­n officials had provided.

Asked if officials should have considered whether Sroubek was an excluded person before giving him the file, Mr LeesGallow­ay said a review into the process should answer that question.

Mr LeesGallow­ay had granted Sroubek residency, but asked Immigratio­n NZ to review the case after a court document emerged showing Sroubek had returned to the Czech Republic in 2009.

This undermined Sroubek’s claim his life would be in danger if he was deported.

The review found new informatio­n, from Interpol, that led to yesterday’s decision that Sroubek was liable for deportatio­n.

Mr LeesGallow­ay said the new informatio­n was additional to the Czech conviction­s in the case file, but would not elaborate, citing the possibilit­y of an appeal.

He conceded public trust and confidence had been damaged, and the buck stopped with him.

However, he would not resign, but had apologised to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

Ms Ardern said she maintained confidence in Mr LeesGallow­ay.

‘‘I think, now, obviously, he’s issued a decision and now it’s up to us to make sure we improve the way things are done in the future.’’

Immigratio­n NZ is reviewing how it prepares case files, which will be completed in March. — NZME

 ??  ?? Iain LeesGallow­ay
Iain LeesGallow­ay
 ??  ?? Karel Sroubek
Karel Sroubek

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand