Immigration New Zealand confirmed that the dossier used for the issue of the residence permit by Karel Sroubek was hundreds of pages with a summary of 12 pages and did not contain documentation indicating that the drug smuggler in Latvia had returned to Europe .
He has since received information from the Czech authorities and expects to continue the investigation in the case next week.
On Thursday, it was revealed that the Immigration Minister Iain Lees-Galloway passed the residence decision less than an hour and did not read the entire file.
The minister said he had read the "aspects" of the file.
New Zealand (INZ) immigration director Stephen Dunstan confirmed on Friday that the Sroubek file was "a few hundred pages", adding warning warnings.
"A really good summary" in the case file was about 12 pages, he said.
The construction of files sent to the minister has been done in the same way for 15 years, he said.
Standard practice included the reasons why the person was responsible, the person's history of immigration, details of convictions, personal circumstances of the client and possible comments, which are sometimes quite extensive, he said.
Information about his convictions containing Judicial Notes would be included in the Sroubek file.
Dunstan suggested that the document does not contain documents that showed that Sroubek had returned to Europe.
Asked if the minister had documents showing that Sroubek had returned to Europe, he said: "This was not in the file – I do not want too much to file too, because there is an obvious search."
ROSA WOODS & ALEX LIU / STUFF
Prime Minister Jacinto Ardern defends Minister Karel Sroubek's decision.
Asked whether the file contained information about what Sroubek had received in the Czech Republic, he said that immigration did not usually provide this information.
The information would be based on a certain conviction for which he was responsible for expulsion.
If data is missing, then this is not important for the decision that the minister will make or whether immigration would not be, he said.
In the course of seven weeks, the minister would have one day to look at "rather large" files, and he would often be between two and five before the minister at any time, he said.
Things he asked Lees-Galloway to see how many files he looked at the day he made the Sroubek decision, but it was said that the information was not yet available.
Vrhnika officials, acquainted with all the contents, would also be in the room with the minister on his questions for answers, said Dunstan.
Immigration officials were leading a robust process of gathering information for the minister and did not conduct investigations, he said.
No recommendations were included. "This is the absolute judgment of the decision maker," he said.
Last week, Lees-Galloway ordered a review of the case when information came to light that he had "directly opposed" what he had referred to when deciding.
In the investigation, INZ returned to the Czech authorities and received some information from them about what they were doing, Dunstan said.
The investigation carried out by the INZ Compliance Group has progressed, and hoped to complete the next week.
But all the findings should be guaranteed to Sroubeku to ensure that the process is "squeaky clean," he said.
It is understood that the investigation was studying new allegations that Sroubek had already returned to the Czech Republic and his ex-wife was no longer supported in his role.
State Secretary for Immigration Michael Woodhouse said that during the time of the minister he met with officials when he attended the meeting, and between two and five files in the series could be considered and also an oral report.
Reading summaries was not unusual or bad if it followed the prima facie case (made by officials) for deportation, he said.
The starting point was that they were responsible for expulsion, and then I thought about options.
Difficult cases came to him on numerous occasions before he signed them.
"I'm trying to paint this file in my head. On the facts we know, I do not understand why he took the decision he made."
He identified it in two scenarios – this was the perfect "cock" and the horrible decision of the minister, who was not above his portfolio, which he doubted.
"But I think there may have been presentations or political pressures."
Lees-Galloway strongly stated that he decided to approve Sroubek's resident, referring to the ongoing investigation.
He claimed that the decision was based on all the information that was presented to him.