Tribunal Rejects All 40 Khalistan-Linked Asylum Cases

New Zealand’s Immigration and Protection Tribunal has rejected all 40 published asylum cases linked to Khalistan that it decided in 2025 and 2026, marking a clear shift from two successful claims granted in 2024. According to a review of published tribunal decisions, 15 such cases were decided in 2025 and 25 so far in 2026. None resulted in refugee recognition.

The decisions, reported by the Kiwi-Indian news outlet Awaaz and covered by The New Indian Express and The Tribune, indicate that support for Khalistan or participation in related political activity, without evidence of a specific and credible risk of persecution, is insufficient on its own to establish refugee status. The tribunal has repeatedly found that later applicants had significantly lower-profile political activity and provided insufficient evidence that Indian authorities were aware of their involvement.

Recent Cases Highlight Tribunal's Stance

In one case cited by Awaaz and The Australia Today, an applicant had voted in a non-binding Khalistan referendum in Auckland and attended a protest outside the Indian High Commission in Wellington. The tribunal found those activities were “low level” and there was no evidence they had attracted the attention of Indian authorities. The tribunal also stated that voting in a referendum, attending a protest, and following pro-Khalistan accounts online is “not enough” to establish refugee status.

Furthermore, the tribunal has indicated that just because police have previously questioned or suspected an individual of separatist sympathies does not automatically establish the legally required “real chance” of future persecution. Applicants must demonstrate a credible and individualised risk of persecution if returned to India.

2024 Successes and Their Criteria

The reversal follows two successful cases in 2024, when the tribunal recognised Indian nationals as refugees after accepting that their public support for Khalistan could expose them to persecution if returned to India. In both those rulings, the tribunal found the appellants to be credible supporters of an independent Sikh state. The successful applicants had highly visible political profiles, including sustained pro-Khalistan social media activity, involvement with separatist groups and, in one case, a prominent Khalistan-related tattoo.

In the first 2024 case, the tribunal heard a man who had joined pro-Khalistan Facebook groups in 2017. He had regularly shared material on Facebook and Instagram and followed prominent separatist figures. In the second case, the appellant had spent years engaging with pro-Khalistan material online and had a prominent pro-Khalistan tattoo. An earlier notable successful case in 2020 involved an appellant with more than 3,000 Facebook friends and pro-Khalistan TikTok videos attracting thousands of views, prominent tattoos connected to the cause, and was found to be a genuine supporter of Khalistan.

Lawyers have since cited one or both of the 2024 decisions in at least nine unsuccessful cases, according to The Australia Today. The tribunal has distinguished publicly expressing support for Khalistan from establishing that such activity creates a genuine risk of persecution. To qualify for refugee status based on Khalistan support, an applicant must demonstrate a sustained, highly visible and credible profile that creates a realistic prospect of targeted state retaliation.

Official Response and Data Limitations

Immigration New Zealand does not categorise publicly available asylum data according to the particular political or other grounds invoked by applicants. An INZ spokesperson told Awaaz: “While some information may exist within case records, it would require extensive manual review and is not held in a readily retrievable format for reporting purposes.”

Intelligence Allegations

Intelligence sources have alleged that pro-Khalistan networks operating in the diaspora have used promises of visas and employment abroad to recruit youth from Punjab. Sources also alleged growing cooperation between Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and pro-Khalistan networks in western countries, involving funding, narcotics trafficking, propaganda and the use of asylum as a legal process. Additionally, fabricated letters identifying applicants as party workers with claims of religious persecution were allegedly provided to support asylum applications, with such documents allegedly being sold.