Immigration New Zealand has confirmed that the cases used to give Karel Sroubek residence permit were hundreds of pages long, with a summary of 12 pages, and did not include documentation showing that the Czech drug smuggler had returned to Europe.
It has since received information from Czech authorities and expects to complete its investigation of the case next week.
On Thursday, immigration minister Iain Lees-Galloway discovered the settlement decision in less than an hour and he did not read the entire file.
The minister said he had read "aspects" of the file.
Immigrant New Zealand (INZ) Secretary General Stephen Dunstan Confirmed On Friday The Sroubek file was "several hundred" pages long, with judging judge notes attached.
The "really good summary" in the cases the file was was about 12 pages long, he said.
The construction of files that went to the minister had been done in the same way for 15 years, he said.
The standard practices included reasons why the person was responsible, the person's immigration history, details of possible convictions, the client's personal circumstances and any comments they would make, which was sometimes quite extensive, he said.
Sroubek's file should contain details of his convictions that contained the judge's judgmental notes.
Dunstan suggested that the file did not contain documents that showed that Sroubek returned to Europe.
When asked about the minister, the documentation that showed that Sroubek had returned to Europe, he said: "It was not in the file – I do not want to get into the file too much because there is obviously a survey going on."
ROSA WOODS & ALEX LIU / STUFF
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern defends minister of decision on Karel Sroubek.
When you asked if the file contained information about what Sroubek went into in the Czech Republic, he said that immigration usually did not give that information.
The information would be based on a certain conviction that made him responsible for expulsion.
If information was missing, it was not relevant for a decision that a minister would do or immigration did not, he said.
During the Sunday week, the minister had one day to look at "quite big" cases and often between two and five put the minister at some point, he said.
stuff the Lees-Galloway office asked how many files he saw on the day when he made the decision about Sroubek but was told that information could not yet be provided.
Senior officials, familiar with all the material, would also have been in the room with the minister on their answer questions, said Dunstan.
Immigrant officials ran a robust process of gathering information to a minister and not conducting investigations, he said.
No recommendations were included. "It is according to the decision-maker's absolute discretion," he said.
Last week, Lees-Galloway ordered a review of the case when information emerged as "directly contradicted" what he claimed when making his decision.
INZ had returned to the Czech authorities as part of its investigation and received some information from those who looked at, Dunstan said.
The survey made by INZ's compliant team made good progress, and he hoped it would be completed next week.
But some finds would also have to give Sroubek to ensure that the process was "very clean," he said.
It is understood that the investigation investigated new allegations that Sroubek had already returned to the Czech Republic, and his ex-wife is no longer supported in his application.
National immigration spokesman Michael Woodhouse said when he was minister he would meet with officials once in a meeting in the house and there may be between two and five files in the party to consider and he would also get an oral report.
The reading of summary notes was not uncommon or bad about the course of prima facie case (made by officials) for expulsion would be followed, he said.
The starting point was that they were responsible for expulsion and then he would consider alternatives.
Heavy cases came to him on several occasions before signing them.
"I try to form that file in my head. If facts we know, I can not understand why he made the decision he made."
He cooked it in two scenarios – it was a complete "cock-up" and a terrible decision by a minister, not over his portfolio, which he doubted.
"But I think there may have been representations or political pressures."
Lees-Galloway has remained tight on why he took the decision to grant a residence permit to Sroubek, referring to the ongoing investigation.
He claimed that the decision was based on all information presented to him.