Sroubek makes fresh attempt for residency
Czech drug smuggler Karel Sroubek has lodged an application for residency in his true identity.
Earlier this month Stuff reported he had obtained a passport in his real name, but had yet to provide it to an Immigration New Zealand office with the appropriate paperwork to have residency considered.
Immigration NZ officials have confirmed they have since received a copy of Sroubek’s travel document, in his true identity, with the appropriate paperwork. This was now ‘‘being considered’’.
The significance of the application is likely to depend on the outcome of Sroubek’s appeal to the Immigration Protection Tribunal.
When Immigration Minister Iain Lees-Galloway initially granted Sroubek residency in September, he sent him a letter outlining the strict conditions he needed to meet.
These included presenting Immigration NZ with appropriate documents, including a valid travel document in his real name.
Yesterday, Sroubek’s lawyer, Paul Wicks, said his client was now simply meeting the requirements set out in the minister’s initial residency letter.
‘‘Mr Sroubek’s position is that the first decision ought to remain valid and he is obviously challenging the decision to revoke that.’’
‘‘He was required as a condition of the first letter to provide a valid travel document within a certain timeframe ... so to ensure his position is preserved, he has met that condition.’’
If Sroubek’s appeal was successful and he had already met the minister’s conditions, then he believed he would be a resident, Wicks said.
In November, Lees-Galloway determined Sroubek was now liable for deportation because a visa was granted in error, after information that showed he was an excluded person was omitted from a file.
It is still unclear what specific grounds Sroubek is appealing but it was understood part of the argument would be establishing if Sroubek was an excluded person.
Last month Wicks told Stuff his client was appealing because he was granted permanent residency and had met the requirements.
New documents released to Stuff under the Official Information Act say that a resident visa would be subject to conditions imposed under the act and if Sroubek did not comply he may become liable for deportation. ‘‘It should be noted that due to Sroubek’s conviction and sentence in New Zealand for importing ecstasy, he is an ‘excluded person’ [under the act] and may not be granted a visa unless it is done pursuant to a special direction [from the minister].’’
Wicks said: ‘‘That’s what the act says. You’ve got to establish that he was in fact an excluded person.’’
The OIA documents, which the minister reviewed when making his second decision, show it was not just a yes or no choice for the minister and he could still have used his discretion to allow Sroubek to remain in New Zealand.
He was offered six options to consider and a letter addressed to Sroubek, for each one.
Wicks said he was not aware of this until he saw the OIA.
The options included: advising no determination could be made; deciding deportation should proceed; deciding deportation liability should be cancelled; deciding deportation liability should be suspended for five years (subject to conditions); deciding deportation liability should be suspended by a length of time decided by the minister; or granting a further visa where a visa was granted in error.
The documents say Sroubek was convicted and sentenced to four years and six months imprisonment in the Czech Republic, revealing he lied on his residency application because he ticked a box saying he had no convictions.
The tranche of documents also states Sroubek’s immigration history was ‘‘not clear-cut’’ and the Department of Internal Affairs confirmed he was not a New Zealand citizen under either of his identities.
The file confirms he had travelled in and out of New Zealand multiple times since his first recorded entry in 2003 and was twice granted a variation to bail conditions in 2009 to allow him to travel to the Czech Republic for business.
It also includes submissions made by Wicks and Sroubek, calling on the minister not to revoke his decision. It appears Sroubek still claims his life is in danger which he had previously stated was ‘‘still real and almost guaranteed’’.
‘‘[He lists] a number of ways he would not like to see himself die, with the implication being that the authorities would kill him while making it look like an accident ... he has no support in the Czech Republic ... if he is deported it would be a death sentence and a very difficult way of rebuilding his life.’’
The majority of the submissions are redacted but in one section Wicks points out: ‘‘For completeness, Mr Sroubek’s visa has not been cancelled under section 67 [administrative error] nor has a visa been granted to him in accordance with section 68 of the act [Grant of further visa where visa granted in error]’’.
The documents also inform the minister his decision on deportation liability, if person’s visa was granted in error, was separate from his decision of September 2018, to grant Sroubek a new resident visa with conditions. ‘‘Any deportation decision you make from this current case will exist in its own right, as the two cases are presented on different grounds.’’
Yesterday, a spokeswoman for Lees-Galloway said he would not comment while there was an appeal process under way.
The file confirms Karel Sroubek travelled in and out of New Zealand multiple times since his first recorded entry in 2003.