New Zealand's Immigration and Protection Tribunal has dismissed all 40 published asylum cases linked to support for the Khalistan cause that it adjudicated across 2025 and 2026, according to a review of published tribunal rulings. The sweep of rejections marks a notable shift from 2024, when the same tribunal granted refugee status to two applicants on comparable grounds.

Scale of the Rejections

Of the 40 dismissed cases, 15 were decided in 2025 and a further 25 in 2026. Not a single applicant among them was granted refugee status, according to the review cited by Khalsa Vox. Collectively, the rulings signal that identifying with or publicly supporting the Khalistan cause is not, in itself, sufficient to meet New Zealand's legal threshold for refugee protection.

How the 2024 Cases Differed

The contrast with the two successful 2024 applications is instructive. In those earlier cases, Indian nationals were granted refugee status after the tribunal concluded that the nature and visibility of their political activities could plausibly expose them to persecution upon return to India. The more recent rulings have drawn a sharper legal line between expressing public support for Khalistan and demonstrating a genuine, individual risk of persecution — a distinction that has proved decisive.

What the Tribunal Found Lacking

A recurring weakness in the rejected cases, according to the review, was the relatively limited scope of the applicants' political involvement. The tribunal also found insufficient evidence that Indian authorities had become aware of, or taken any active interest in, the applicants' activities abroad.

In one illustrative case, an applicant had participated in a non-binding Khalistan referendum in Auckland and joined a demonstration outside the Indian High Commission in Wellington. The tribunal characterised these activities as 'low level' and found no evidence that they had drawn the individual to the attention of authorities in India.

Legal Threshold for Refugee Status

The review makes clear that applicants must demonstrate circumstances specific to their own case and provide credible evidence of a genuine risk of persecution upon return to India. Factors the tribunal weighs include the nature and visibility of political activities, organisational affiliations, public exposure, and any documented interest from Indian authorities. Merely attending a rally or signing a petition, the rulings suggest, falls well short of that bar.

Data Gaps and the Bigger Picture

Notably, the review acknowledged the absence of comprehensive official data on the total number of Khalistan-related asylum applications lodged in New Zealand. The 40 cases examined represent only those that reached the tribunal and were made publicly available — meaning the full volume of such claims remains unclear. This caveat limits how definitive any trend assessment can be, though the unbroken run of rejections across two years is, by any measure, a significant legal development.