A New Zealand refugee tribunal has rejected a Sikh man’s claim that he faced persecution in India because of his participation in pro-Khalistan activities in New Zealand, ruling that his involvement was low-level and unlikely to have attracted the attention of Indian authorities.
As per Awaaz, the Immigration and Protection Tribunal (IPT) found that the Indian citizen, who is in his mid-20s, did not face a real risk of persecution if returned to India despite attending a non-binding Khalistan referendum event in Auckland in 2024, voting in the referendum and joining a protest outside the Indian High Commission in Wellington.
The tribunal said there was no evidence that Indian authorities were aware of his activities or had shown any interest in him.
The man had also shared support for pro-Khalistan pages online and was photographed holding a Khalsa flag and a placard during a protest. However, the tribunal found his social media presence was limited and did not place him in a category considered at risk.
The decision distinguished his case from earlier successful appeals involving individuals with more extensive pro-Khalistan activism, including stronger online profiles, long-term advocacy and other evidence that could attract official attention.
The man had claimed he feared targeting in Punjab due to his political views and alleged previous threats from individuals he believed were linked to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Further, he also alleged he had been allegedly assaulted after a Sikh rally.
However, the tribunal found that while the past incidents were concerning, they did not demonstrate a continuing risk of serious harm. It noted that he continued living in the same area for months after the alleged incidents without further problems, and his family had not experienced difficulties since he left India.
The tribunal also ruled that he could safely relocate within India, including to major cities with significant Sikh populations such as Amritsar, Ludhiana or Jalandhar.
It rejected arguments that a nationwide political network could locate and harm him, saying there was insufficient evidence to support such claims.
The tribunal concluded that the risk of future persecution was “remote and speculative” and dismissed his applications for refugee protection under the Refugee Convention, the Convention Against Torture and international human rights protections.
Support our Journalism
No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.
