Dear Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment,
Under the Official Information Act 1982, I request the following information:

The Minister stated in public information released this month that the number of backlogged asylum claim cases has already reached a historical peak.
Therefore, please disclose the following information:
1. Has the proposal made public in 2024 to increase staffing by 52 Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) in order to address the backlog of asylum claim cases still not been fully implemented as of now?

2. We note that, in the 2025 Bondi Beach shooting incident in Sydney, Australia, one person risked his life to stop the gunman and was widely regarded as having helped save many lives; there were also reports showing that persons with a refugee background also risked their lives to save people at the scene. Please disclose whether, when formulating this current policy relating to asylum claim cases, refugee determination, or related policies, the New Zealand government referred to cases in other Refugee Convention countries where asylum claimants or persons already granted protection made positive contributions to society, as a reference factor for policy judgment, risk assessment, or institutional design.

3. Does the government currently still have no further plan to increase staffing related to asylum claim cases?

4. In light of the Minister’s public statements this month and the government’s future plans to respond to the backlog of asylum claim cases, please disclose whether the government has referred to the practices of other Refugee Convention countries in examining asylum claim cases.

5. Please disclose whether the government has comprehensively examined the causes of the backlog of asylum claim cases reaching a historical peak, especially including the following aspects:
(a) whether it is related to internal staff shortages;
(b) whether it is related to the excessive length of time taken by officers to examine each individual case;
(c) whether it is related to the approval process for most asylum claim cases being excessively stringent (with reference to the practices of other Refugee Convention countries for comparison).

6. In light of the Minister’s public statements this month and the government’s future plans to respond to the backlog of asylum claim cases, the relevant approach appears to attribute most of the responsibility and consequences for the backlog of asylum claim cases reaching a historical peak to the asylum claimants themselves. Please disclose whether, when forming the above policy, position, or plan, the government ever relied on data, research, risk assessments, legal advice, or human rights impact assessments to analyse whether such an approach could cause harm to persons who genuinely need international protection; and whether it ever assessed whether such an approach could increase the possibility that some persons may be wrongly refused, removed, or placed in situations where they may face torture, persecution, or other serious harm.

If the government has conducted the above examinations, comparisons, or assessments, please disclose the relevant documents, reports, opinions, briefings, analyses, or recommendations.

Yours faithfully,

Vivian

Dear Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment,
Further to point 2 of my original request, I would like to add the following clarification: the “cases where asylum claimants or persons already granted protection made positive contributions to society” referred to in point 2 also include domestic New Zealand cases.

We note that, according to public reporting, during the Christchurch mosque attack in New Zealand, Abdul Aziz Wahabzadah, who has been reported as having a refugee background, risked his life to confront the gunman and prevented him from re-entering the mosque to continue harming people, and was therefore widely regarded as having saved many lives.

Please also clarify whether, when formulating the current policy relating to asylum claim cases, refugee status determination, or related policies, the New Zealand government considered cases of this kind — namely, cases in which persons with an asylum seeker, refugee, or protected background made major positive contributions — as a reference factor in policy judgment, risk assessment, or institutional design.

This clarification is intended only as an explanation and example under point 2 of the original request, rather than a new request.

Yours faithfully,
Vivian