New Zealand Immigration Fraud Case Leads to Arrest in the Philippines After Cross-Border Investigation

A New Zealand immigration fraud investigation has led to an arrest in the Philippines in what Immigration New Zealand says is a landmark example of cross-border enforcement.

Julie Pearl De Los Santos, also known as Julie Pearl Robejes, was convicted in the Manukau District Court in July 2025 on five charges of providing false or misleading information to Immigration New Zealand.

She was sentenced to seven months of home detention, ordered to pay $25,000 in reparations to five victims, and later deported from New Zealand in November 2025.

But the case did not end there.

During the investigation, Immigration New Zealand investigators uncovered information suggesting Robejes may also have committed offences in the Philippines.

That information was shared with Philippine authorities, triggering cooperation between Immigration New Zealand, the Philippines Department of Migrant Workers and the Philippine Embassy in New Zealand.

On 18 August 2026, Philippine authorities confirmed Robejes had been arrested over allegations of syndicated illegal recruitment.

She remains in custody while the matter proceeds through the Philippine courts.

The case at a glance

Immigration New Zealand says leaving the country does not end accountability

National Manager Immigration Investigations Jason Perry said the case should send a clear message to anyone involved in immigration fraud or migrant exploitation.

“Immigration fraud doesn't stop at the border, and neither do we,” Perry said.

“Anyone who exploits migrants for personal gain should take note: you cannot assume that leaving New Zealand means leaving the consequences behind.”

That is probably the most important lesson from the case.

Immigration offending is often international by nature.

A person may recruit migrants overseas, prepare documents in one country, submit visa information in another and move money across borders.

That creates obvious enforcement challenges.

But it also means investigators increasingly need to work across jurisdictions rather than treat each country as a separate case.

The investigation went beyond the New Zealand conviction

Immigration New Zealand says the case could have ended after the successful prosecution, sentence and deportation.

Instead, investigators looked at whether the information already gathered pointed to possible offending outside New Zealand.

Perry said the team asked whether further action could prevent additional harm.

“The evidence suggested there may be victims outside New Zealand, so the team worked with authorities in the Philippines to ensure the right information reached the right people,” he said.

Representatives from the Philippines Department of Migrant Workers travelled to New Zealand and met investigators and complainants directly.

They gathered evidence and progressed their own enquiries before Philippine authorities later confirmed the arrest.

INZ says that level of cooperation is unusual and, to its knowledge, this is the first investigation of its kind between Immigration New Zealand and the Philippines Department of Migrant Workers.

Why this matters for people trying to come to New Zealand

Cases like this are a reminder that immigration fraud often begins with hope.

People may spend years saving money to study, work or settle overseas.

They may trust someone claiming to understand visa rules, employer requirements or recruitment pathways.

When that trust is abused, the loss can be far greater than the money paid.

Perry said the victims in this case had trusted someone who promised to help them build a better future.

Instead, they lost money, opportunities and, in some cases, their chance to come to New Zealand.

“The impact of this type of offending can be devastating,” he said.

“People can spend years saving for these opportunities and make major life decisions based on false promises.”

The broader lesson: immigration systems are becoming harder to game

For people considering dishonest shortcuts, the message from this case is straightforward.

Providing false information to Immigration New Zealand can lead to prosecution.

If the offending involves people or activity overseas, the consequences may not stop with a New Zealand sentence or deportation.

Authorities can share information.

Foreign agencies can open their own investigations.

And alleged offending in another country can lead to separate criminal proceedings under that country's law.

That matters because some people involved in immigration fraud may assume that once they leave New Zealand, local authorities have little practical ability to follow what happens next.

This case suggests that assumption can be badly wrong.

Good applicants should also take reassurance from the case

There is another side to the story.

The vast majority of migrants are trying to navigate the immigration system lawfully.

For those people, enforcement against fraud is not something to fear.

It is one of the ways New Zealand protects the integrity of the visa system.

If fraudulent applications, fake recruitment schemes or misleading information are allowed to spread, legitimate applicants can also suffer.

Processing becomes harder.

Trust declines.

More checks may be introduced.

And genuine employers and applicants can end up carrying the administrative burden created by dishonest operators.

Strong enforcement therefore protects not only New Zealand's border system, but also people trying to use that system honestly.

What legitimate applicants should do

People applying to work, study or live in New Zealand should be cautious about anyone promising guaranteed visas, guaranteed jobs or special access to immigration decision-makers.

A few basic precautions can reduce the risk:

• Check immigration requirements through official New Zealand Government sources.

• Be wary of anyone promising a guaranteed visa outcome.

• Do not sign forms containing information you know is false.

• Read documents before they are submitted in your name.

• Keep copies of contracts, receipts, visa applications and correspondence.

• Be cautious about large recruitment or placement fees.

• Verify job offers directly with the employer where possible.

• If using an immigration adviser, check that the person is legally permitted to provide immigration advice.

• Report suspected fraud or exploitation rather than assuming nothing can be done.

The most important point is simple: an applicant remains responsible for information submitted in their name.

Someone else preparing the paperwork does not make false information safe.

Why false information is taken seriously

Immigration decisions depend heavily on documents and declarations.

Visa officers assess employment history, qualifications, finances, relationships, health, character and other information when deciding whether a person meets the rules.

If those details are deliberately manipulated, the integrity of the decision-making process breaks down.

That is why false or misleading information can lead to serious consequences.

Depending on the circumstances, those consequences can include a declined application, future immigration difficulties, prosecution, deportation or other enforcement action.

This case shows that where wider offending is suspected, it may also trigger investigation in another country.

A warning to recruiters and intermediaries

The case is particularly relevant to people operating in migrant recruitment.

Recruitment businesses and immigration intermediaries occupy positions of considerable trust.

They may be dealing with applicants who have limited knowledge of New Zealand law and are relying heavily on advice given to them.

That creates an obvious imbalance of power.

Where someone exploits that position for financial gain, the harm can be severe.

People can take loans, sell property or leave employment based on representations that later prove false.

That is why regulators in both New Zealand and migrant-source countries have increasingly focused on illegal recruitment, false employment offers and misleading visa arrangements.

The Philippines arrest is an allegation, not a conviction

It is important to distinguish the New Zealand conviction from the current Philippine case.

Robejes was convicted in New Zealand in 2025 on five charges of providing false or misleading information to Immigration New Zealand.

The Philippine matter is different.

She has been arrested on allegations of syndicated illegal recruitment and remains in custody while the case proceeds through the Philippine judicial system.

Those allegations have not yet resulted in a conviction and should not be treated as proven unless and until determined by the Philippine courts.

That distinction matters in responsible reporting.

Cross-border cooperation is becoming increasingly important

New Zealand's immigration system depends heavily on international cooperation.

Visa applicants come from around the world.

Recruitment networks can operate across several countries.

Employment documents may be issued overseas.

Money may move through international accounts.

People suspected of offending can also leave one jurisdiction and establish themselves elsewhere.

No immigration agency can effectively investigate all of that in isolation.

This case demonstrates how evidence gathered in one country can become relevant to authorities somewhere else.

According to INZ, the cooperation involved not just passing on a file, but direct engagement between investigators, complainants and Philippine officials.

That is a much stronger form of collaboration.

A timely development in the New Zealand-Philippines relationship

The case comes during a significant year for relations between New Zealand and the Philippines.

The two countries are marking 60 years of diplomatic relations in 2026 and have elevated their relationship to a Comprehensive Partnership.

Much of that relationship is naturally focused on trade, security, labour mobility and people-to-people connections.

But effective cooperation between law-enforcement and regulatory agencies is also part of a mature bilateral relationship.

Thousands of Filipinos live and work in New Zealand and make an important contribution across healthcare, construction, hospitality, agriculture and other sectors.

Protecting those legitimate pathways from fraudulent operators is in the interests of both countries.

The lesson for migrants is not to be afraid of immigration enforcement

Stories about prosecutions can sometimes create anxiety among migrants, especially those who are unfamiliar with New Zealand's legal system.

But there is an important distinction between strict immigration enforcement and hostility towards migrants.

A strong immigration system should be capable of doing both things at once:

welcoming legitimate migrants and acting firmly against people who exploit them.

Those goals are not contradictory.

They support each other.

When rules are clear and enforced consistently, genuine applicants know what is expected of them and dishonest operators have less room to manipulate vulnerable people.

A case with two very different messages

For people considering immigration fraud, this case is a warning.

A conviction can lead to punishment, reparations and deportation.

And leaving New Zealand may not end the consequences if evidence points to offending elsewhere.

For genuine migrants, the message is different.

Use legitimate channels.

Tell the truth.

Check what is being submitted in your name.

Do not trust anyone promising shortcuts that sound too good to be true.

And if someone is exploiting you, report it.

The strongest immigration system is not simply the one that catches dishonest applicants.

It is the one that also protects honest people from those who profit from their dreams.

In this case, Immigration New Zealand says that principle led investigators beyond a New Zealand courtroom and into an unprecedented partnership with Philippine authorities.

What began as a local immigration fraud investigation has now become an international case, and a reminder that migrant exploitation increasingly demands an international response.

Source: Immigration New Zealand media release, 2 September 2026.