New Zealand Police v Hanif  NZDC 7557
Published 29 May 2018
Supplied false or misleading information to an immigration officer — human trafficking — immigration — definition of visitor — verdict — Immigration Act 2009, s 342 (1) (b).
The defendant barrister faced five charges alleging that he supplied information to an immigration officer knowing that it was false or misleading, namely, information about the reasons for three separate individuals' visits to New Zealand and their applications for visitor visas.
The complainants' clear intentions were to work in New Zealand. In Fiji they had answered an advertisement for work in New Zealand. The defendant's defence was that he simply wrote in the applications what he was told by the applicants and that he had no knowledge of whether they were working or not. The defendant also suggested that the complainants had been induced or given 'immunity' to give evidence. This was rejected by the immigration officer.
The evidence of the complainants was preferred. The court found that the defendant met one of the complainants in his work clothes and that he had been involved in discussions regarding work performance. The court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly supplied information to an immigration officer that was false or misleading in material respects, namely, information about the reasons for visiting New Zealand for applications for visitor visas. The defendant was found guilty on all charges.
Judgment Date: 30 April 2018