This story discusses graphic details of sexual offending and may be upsetting for some readers.

A Samoan man who sexually abused a child over several years has avoided deportation after a tribunal ruled that removing him from New Zealand would be unjustly harsh and likely to end his marriage.

The man, in his mid-20s, became liable for deportation after pleading guilty to representative charges of performing an indecent act on a child under 12 and performing an indecent act on a young person under 16.

In 2023, he was sentenced to 10 months' home detention and 12 months' supervision for the offending, which occurred between 2018 and 2021.

Despite finding the man's offending was serious and involved a breach of trust against a vulnerable child, the Immigration and Protection Tribunal allowed his appeal against deportation, concluding there were exceptional humanitarian circumstances in his case.

Those circumstances included his decade-long residence in New Zealand, the fact he had spent all of his adult life here, and the likely impact deportation would have on his marriage to a New Zealand citizen.

Marriage and rehabilitation

The man arrived in New Zealand as a teenager. He attended school in Auckland before finding work with a company where he remains employed.

The tribunal heard evidence that he struggled to adjust after arriving in New Zealand. English was not his first language and he had little exposure to life outside his conservative Samoan upbringing.

According to the tribunal's recent decision, the man met his wife in 2019. Their relationship developed and they married in 2021, soon after the offending came to light and before criminal charges were filed.

His wife told the tribunal she had been devastated, angry and confused after learning what he had done, but ultimately chose to support him through his rehabilitation.

The tribunal accepted their relationship was genuine and noted the length of time the couple had been together.

The man's employer, pastor and relatives, all of whom supported his appeal, also gave evidence.

His employer described him as one of the company's most respected staff members and said he had grown into a skilled and valued employee with strong prospects for advancement.

The tribunal heard that the man completed an intensive treatment programme through Safe, a specialist provider for people who have engaged in harmful sexual behaviour.

A counsellor reported the man showed genuine remorse, developed insight into his offending and demonstrated a strong commitment to rehabilitation.

The tribunal also considered sentencing remarks from the District Court, which identified several aggravating features of the offending, including the victim's age, the breach of trust, the length of time the abuse continued and the harm caused to the child.

Why the appeal succeeded

The sentencing judge adopted a starting point of three years' imprisonment before reducing the sentence for factors including the guilty pleas, remorse, rehabilitation prospects and the man's youth at the time of offending.

The man's risk to the public was considered sufficiently low that the judge did not put him on the child sex offender register.

In allowing the appeal, the tribunal found that while the offending was inherently serious, deportation would "most likely end a loving and stable marriage between two young people".

The tribunal accepted that the wife had no practical connection to living in Samoa and would face significant hardship if she relocated there.

It also found the man's ties to New Zealand were particularly strong because he arrived as a teenager and had spent all his adult life in the country.

The decision concluded there were exceptional humanitarian circumstances, that deportation would be unjust or unduly harsh, and that allowing him to remain would not be contrary to the public interest.

The tribunal relied in part on assessments indicating the man presented a low risk of reoffending and noted he had not come to police attention again since the abuse was revealed in 2021.

As a result, the appeal was allowed and his deportation liability was suspended for three years. The suspension was subject to a condition that he not commit further qualifying sexual offences during that period.