Two Indian men denied asylum in New Zealand over same-sex relationship claims

Two Indian men who sought asylum in New Zealand on the basis of a claimed same-sex relationship are facing deportation after an immigration tribunal rejected their appeal, finding key parts of their account were not credible.

The Immigration and Protection Tribunal found that the two men, both from Jammu and in their late 20s, failed to prove they were genuinely in a same-sex relationship. As a result, their asylum and humanitarian claims were rejected.

According to NZ-based publication Awaaz, the men had argued that they fled India in 2023 after facing threats, violence from family members and abuse by police because of their relationship. They said they moved to New Zealand to live safely together as a couple.

However, in a recently released decision, the tribunal dismissed their appeal and concluded that important parts of their evidence were inconsistent and unreliable.

The tribunal ruled: “The appellants’ account of being in a same-sex relationship together and to have experienced difficulties with their families and the police in Jammu…is false.”

It further found that “no weight could be placed” on their claim that they were in a romantic relationship and rejected their allegations of persecution.

Moreover, the tribunal found several inconsistencies in the men's statements, including different accounts of how often they met, how they travelled together and how they were taken back to Jammu after fleeing.

In one instance, the tribunal pointed to conflicting statements over whether they had been transported together in the same vehicle or separately, noting that such details would likely be remembered if the events had actually occurred.

The decision also raised concerns about other aspects of their testimony, including their employment histories and reported interactions with police.

Tribunal members said there were contradictions in the evidence presented.

The men were also unable to provide supporting material such as messages, photographs or other records that could help establish the existence of a relationship before they arrived in New Zealand.

They claimed the evidence had been deleted by family members, but the tribunal said it was not persuaded by that explanation.

The tribunal said the applicants had failed to show they personally faced a real risk of persecution or serious harm in India that would qualify them for protection under New Zealand law.

The tribunal also rejected arguments based on economic hardship and social difficulties in their home region, ruling that such circumstances did not meet the threshold for humanitarian relief.

The pair had been living in New Zealand for around two and a half years, where they worked and shared accommodation.

However, the tribunal concluded that their connections to India remained stronger, noting that close family ties still existed there.

Their appeal was dismissed under the Immigration Act, leaving both men liable for deportation.