DIA official told “to stop asking questions” about Liu

May 26th, 2012 at 12:26 pm by David Farrar

Jared Savage in the NZ Herald reports:

The public servant who handled the citizenship application of a millionaire Chinese businessman with multiple identities was told by his boss to “stop asking questions”, a transcript of court evidence shows.

Nothing to see here, just move on.

Mr Gambo wanted to make further inquiries with immigration authorities in Australia.

“I had a phone call that I was told not to ask any more questions because there was a lot of political pressure to send the file to Wellington.

“I was told to just process the file, send it to Wellington, don’t worry about asking any more questions.

“I have been working there for seven years and that was the first time I have had my boss phone me about an application.”

This is what is at the heart of the case. That a man with friends in the Labour Party, got special treatment.

has previously said he granted Mr Yan citizenship on humanitarian grounds because an Internal Affairs official told him Mr Yan risked execution if he returned to China.

Yesterday, an Internal Affairs spokesman said the files on the case had now been checked and there was no record of a departmental official discussing that issue with Mr Jones.

“We are not saying absolutely that didn’t happen, but we don’t have any [record of it].”

The execution in China angle was pushed by Yan, and his lawyer (who also happens to be Dover Samuels’ lawyer). As far as I am aware they have never provided a shred of proof. Anyone can assert something. What a competent Minister does is ask for proof, or at least consider the plausibility of the claims, such as will being a citizen rather than a permament resident in any impact whether or not he goes to China, and how consistent is it to claim to be Falun Gong, which bans gambling, and spent millions at Sky City casino.

Tags: , , ,

32 Responses to “DIA official told “to stop asking questions” about Liu”

  1. Nick R (507 comments) says:

    You’re suggesting a QC made up the threat to Yan’s life? That’s… um… brave. Or something.

    [DPF: The QC is an advocate for his client. He says whatever his or her client tells him to say. You know this, so why are you being misleading?

    If the QC was an independent witness, then I would treat their testimony as credible. But when they are acting as an advocate for their client, then the issue is not their credibility - but their client's]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Liberty (267 comments) says:

    It makes Nick Smiths little indiscretion.
    Pretty minor.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Komata (1,191 comments) says:

    Out of curiosity: Given the circumstances under which Liu was able to essentially buy his citizenship, can this now be revoked and he be deported back to China? Or would that disturb too many flies around an already highly-odorous dung heap, and also drag the civil liberties ‘enthusiasts’ out of their holes? One wonders.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    “We are not saying absolutely that didn’t happen, but we don’t have any [record of it].”

    Their record-keeping could be crap which would not be a surprise. I wonder how many times records are not created by officials.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    I am bemused by DPF’s faith in Internal Affairs being beyond reproach. Didn’t Internal Affairs say that Jones had the file for only one day before he approved Liu’s citizenship, when it seems he had the file for at least 3 weeks? If that’s the case, I’d be sceptical of anything emanating from that department.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Keeping Stock (10,337 comments) says:

    Just another reason why a wide-ranging independent inquiry, perhaps by a retired High Court judge is required. There are simply too many unanswered questions now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. jims_whare (403 comments) says:

    Basicly, Shane Jones was either corrupt or incompetent, there can’t be any other way of reading this sorry affair.

    Either way his time in the public life is drawing to a close – I would suggest he resign and find something else to do and think himself fortunate that he isn’t joining Mr Fields as a flat mate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. scrubone (3,099 comments) says:

    I am bemused by DPF’s faith in Internal Affairs being beyond reproach. Didn’t Internal Affairs say that Jones had the file for only one day before he approved Liu’s citizenship, when it seems he had the file for at least 3 weeks? If that’s the case, I’d be sceptical of anything emanating from that department.

    So one detail is questioned and suddenly the entire department can’t be trusted?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. tvb (4,418 comments) says:

    The execution theory provided Jones with enough cover to grant the citizenship without asking too many questions. Everyone is at risk of execution in China especially when they are running short of organ donors for high ranking officials. China does not have the rule of law operating.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    scrubone,

    No, it would seem its more a case (for ross69) of one detail which seems to undermine Jones’s position meaning that the entire department can’t be trusted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Nookin (3,341 comments) says:

    TVB

    If Liu claimed to be a refugee then Jones had no jurisdiction. Jones did have jurisdiction to grant citizenship on humanitarian grounds. It does take a bit more than undocumented and unsupported comment in the backroom, however. This is all a con.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. hmmokrightitis (1,590 comments) says:

    ross, “Their record-keeping could be crap which would not be a surprise. I wonder how many times records are not created by officials.”

    Speculation, based on what, pure fantasy? Actually, their record keeping is exceptional, it has to be. I would suggest its far rather that the honourable member “made shit up”, which will come to light in the near future.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. tknorriss (327 comments) says:

    Yeah. I’d be inclined to believe Internal Affairs account rather than Jones’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. adamsmith1922 (890 comments) says:

    Time for a Corruption Commission in my view

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Liberty

    It makes Nick Smiths little indiscretion.
    Pretty minor.

    Call yourself liberty… you should know by now that it’s different when the red team do it…. See they are just trying to help people. It’s only the nasty Blue team that are doing favours for their rich business backers…

    But having said that, we should judge Nick Smith on his own deeds not relative to those which we say are despicable in the other team.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    ross69

    I am bemused by DPF’s faith in Internal Affairs being beyond reproach.

    Yes yes, we decided to do away with the courts as well because the accused always know they are innocent and all this official report shit just slowed down judging them innocent like they said they were.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. mara (784 comments) says:

    Mr Gambo? Yeah right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. mara (784 comments) says:

    Mister Gambo … yeah right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. big bruv (13,886 comments) says:

    Why is Winston not all over this story?

    It has all the ingredients that the wanker normally likes, Asian’s, corruption (he knows all about that) and more than a hint of scandal.

    His silence is interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Keeping Stock (10,337 comments) says:

    Excellent point Bruv; did he get a backhander as well?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > So one detail is questioned and suddenly the entire department can’t be trusted?

    I didn’t realise the entire department was commenting on this case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    > Actually, their record keeping is exceptional, it has to be.

    How would you know their record-keeping is exceptional? I know from my dealings with the Justice Ministry that their record-keeping is appalling…many records which should have been created were not, or have been lost or destroyed. I am well aware that government departments are required to create and maintain records which are accessible, but clearly for at least one government, that does not happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    clearly for at least one government *dept*, that does not happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    In the circumstances, Jones’ decision seems to have been a reasonable one.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6991447/Yan-carried-torture-scars-letter-told-Jones

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. tknorriss (327 comments) says:

    Turn your brain on, Ross.

    As has been repeated endlessly, Yan already had residency. There was no danger of him being deported back to China as it was. So no need to approve citizenship. This is just a red herring the left keep repeating as if constant repetition will somehow make it true.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    So what you’re saying, tknorriss, is that John Billington QC lied through his teeth? Which of course is different from saying that Jones ignored advice, because what it seems is that he accepted Billington’s advice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. tknorriss (327 comments) says:

    I don’t care what the lawyer for both Yan and Samuels said because it wasn’t relevant.

    Go and have a look what permanent residency means. There was no way Yan was going to get booted out of the country given that he had permanent residency. I don’t care if Billington gave evidence that Yan was going to be slowly dissected while still alive back in China. That is because Yan was perfectly safe here in NZ already. There wasn’t any need for him to be given citizenship to protect his human rights.

    So Jones’s rational for giving citizenship was logically flawed from the outset. You don’t need to be a genius to understand this very clear and obvious point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    tknorriss

    ross69 is an apologist for a corrupt self serving political party – ignore him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. tknorriss (327 comments) says:

    That, I can handle. But I can’t tolerate sheer stupidity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    tknorriss

    China wanted NZ to revoke Liu’s permanent residency. He wasn’t safe here at all. If the citizenship issue was a red herring, as you claim, where is the evidence that Internal Affairs or Immigration advised Jones of this apparent fact?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Are you referring you to yourself?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. tknorriss (327 comments) says:

    Duh. Anything, including citizenship can be revoked. There is a substantial process to go through to revoke residency. It is up to the minister to make the final decision on that as well. So, Jones could have allowed the process to continue, and could have made a decision not to revoke residency if he was really concerned.

    He let the process run in this case that, on the face of it appears to be more deserving of ministerial compassion than the Yan case. Yet Jones didn’t intervene on this occasion. Why not? Or was something more than compassion motivating him in the case of Yan?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote