It’s a pity that the government is not legally bound to respond to a High Court ruling that the present law denying a sentenced prisoner’s right to vote is “unable to be justified” under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.
Last Friday’s ruling was the first time a Court has issued a “declaration of insistency” whereby a law is deemed to be contrary to the Bill of Rights Act. Justice Heath said his formal declaration was “to draw the attention of the New Zealand public that Parliament had enacted legislation [in 2010] inconsistent with a fundamental right.” He said “the inconsistency arises in the context of the most fundamental aspect of a democracy, namely, the right of all citizens to elect those who will govern on their behalf.”
The logical next step would be for the government to respond to the ruling, but it is keeping quiet. A private members bill I had in the Parliamentary ballot back in 2010 would have required a response. Under my New Zealand Bill of Rights Amendment Bill the Attorney-General would have been required to table in the House any “declaration of inconsistency” issued by the Court. Within the six following months the government would be required to inform Parliament what “action the government intends to take” regarding the declaration of inconsistency “and the reasons for that course of action.” Another clause in my Bill required Parliament, when there is some conflict with the Bill of Rights, to investigate “whether there are less restrictive means reasonably available to achieve the purpose that the [Bill of Rights] limiting measures seeks to achieve.”
My Bill would have made specific provision for judicial “declarations of inconsistency” but Justice Heath determined that he was entitled to make such a ruling without it being formally written into law. He cited the existing provision in the Human Rights Act 1993, whereby the Human Rights Review Tribunal [a lower jurisdiction than the High Court] can already make such a declaration when a law “is inconsistent with the right to freedom of discrimination affirmed by section 19 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. “ [Section 92J]
My Bill wouldn’t have given the Courts the power to simply annul legislation, as the US Supreme Court can do under that nation’s Bill of Rights. That would be a step too far for most New Zealand MPs. But there are were other measures in my Bill to help attune MPs to human rights concerns. For every Bill coming before Parliament (not just some Bills as now) the Attorney-General would have to explain any contravention of the Bill of Rights. Additionally, Select Committees would have to report Bill of Rights conflicts flowing from any amendments they make to legislation.
The extra attention our Courts are now giving to Bill of Rights matters can help slow the erosion of our civil liberties which occurs when MPs play excessive attention to the “law and order” lobby.
In conclusion, I’d like to salute Arthur Taylor, the prisoner who brought the case to the High Court under such difficult circumstances. The pressure should now go on the government to repeal the 2010 legislation denying prisoners their voting rights. Surely, it will help in rehabilitation if prisoners are thinking about the big social and environment issues confronting our society and, as citizens, exercising their fundamental right to vote.
[My New Zealand Bill of Rights Amendment Bill is still in the parliamentary private member’s bill ballot under the name of current Green MP David Clendon.]
Separation of powers is a joke in this country.
It’s crazy, the government can just arbitrary decide a sector can’t vote in an election… and then get away with it!
The courts can do nothing about it. What about international courts?
The horse has bolted on this one, opposition parties should have raised the roof of parliament, walking out, picketing, BEFORE the general election.
Opposition parties seem to be more interested in what the Nats might do rather than any ethics or democratic process in the Nats policy. The Nats are playing on this scared oppositions response to polling.
So whenever the Nats do something really bad, the opposition is too scared to raise a proper challenge at the time.
Good on the Greens for trying to do something now, but raising Hell at the time, especially enlisting other opposition MP’s is probably more effective than waiting until this.
I don’t need a judge to tell me, taking away someones right to vote, is wrong. I already knew it. And I would have thought this is what we pay opposition MP’s for.
Just out of interest, what did the Maori party do when this bill went down. I would have thought that with the disproportionate amount of Maori in the system they would have been pretty angry and now Serco.
The partnership of sell outs.
BTW – I got a bulk email from Metiria today about reducing inequality. In particular the pet peeve having a warm dry rental property.
Yep, I agree that that should be done, but please, our country is in real crisis with TPPA, SIS spying, taking away people rights to vote, economic crisis, foreigners buying up our property, OZ farms being bought up cheap (and the same about to happen in NZ).
Please change the record and get onto the other issues that actually effect 100% of Kiwis.
If the Greens want to be effective in opposition, they need to be relevant and not go on and on about an issue which although bad, is something that has been around for decades, most Kiwis were bought up in a damp house, it may be not ideal, but is an issue that maybe effects 15% of the population now and the rest of the population have successfully lived through.
She then goes on to say, that “We have children who come to school with only a packet of chips for lunch. We try to help and provide for those children because we know the parents are struggling financially.”
I’m sure we all know what the MSM response to this statement is. Words fail me to include this stereotype in a mail out.
To me it looks like the Green leadership is out of touch, There are really major terrible things happening in this country. The Greens need to focus on the big picture here.
They have most of the best policies, but choosing to bang on about an issue which apparently is already solved as the Nats have announced rental properties must be insulated within 4 years (I think), and that kids only have chips for lunch, is not helping when there are so many OUTRAGEOUS things the government is doing.
Start focusing on the OUTRAGEOUS things effecting 100% of Kiwis. TPPA is a good one, and actually relevant because Grossly incompetent Grosser might just sign it so he can look like he did something.
The Nats taking away people’s right to vote and Serco being some sort of private gang prison to save money.
Picket parliament, walk out, do something to show the Greens response on this and start being active on serious issues going on TODAY that will effect the future of this country.
I suspect, savenz, that this is a reflection of the Greens’ new direction to the middle following the election of their new leader.
I still haven’t seen anything from them to change my view on them.
So Keith, the gentlemanly way of talking hasn’t worked yet again.
No wonder more and more people are starting to think of the way of the AK47 and the Molotov…
SaveNZ is right! National has saturated this country with issue after issue – probably on purpose – good Crosby/texter guidance – so both the public and it seems the opposition parties, don’t know which way to turn. Everyone needs to look at the priorities NOW – the main one being the TPPA! The opposition parties do need to ‘walk out’ in protest, at least it would make the news, and make people think ‘ooh’ this TPPA thing must be bad! Or even arrest JK for treason against his own citizens – just do something!
@Kim Dandy – love to see a citizens arrest of JK! Good thought!
Of course the Nats are doing it on purpose and it is working! They probably have an army of lobbyists who like those that select for jurys in the US are beavering night and day to achieve their goals, and alter opinion and justice on issues.
It is clearly a trap to have Labour conditionally support TPPA as the Nats know so many people are against it (like mass surveillance) and of course dumbo Labour have to fall for it and try to be everything to all people. Nope, too confusing – those Nat swing voters who might swing to Labour under TPPA issue don’t because Labour appears to support it, and those that are swing Labour voters to the left are outraged and will split the vote. Win win yet again to National.
The only politician who actually seems to be able to cope with dirty politics is Winston so maybe have a look at what he did in Northland and replicate.
All the more ethical politicians who give a damn (even if you don’t agree with them) are disappearing or being undermined. Russell Norman, David Cunliffe, even Colin Craig was a breath of fresh air from the right. The lobbyists certainly felt threatened enough to target him.
Honestly I am more angry at the opposition parties, they are being played, big time. We know the Nats are greedy and would sell their Grandma for a $ or a chance to privatise something but the opposition parties, again and again falling into the same traps and supporting the government or feebly disagreeing with them and then moving back to the same pet peeve (damp houses seem popular with both Labour and the Greens).
Rome burns, but Labour and the Greens try to save the dehumidifier.
Parliament has the last say, can make laws, change laws, or refuse to do so. As the numbers are stacked in there, we can expect, that the present government will simply ignore this ruling and do nothing.
They do the same with much else, and the vast majority of the voting and non voting public do not really care, as prisoners are an absolute minority, perceived to be on the wrong side of the law, so few will have any sympathy, or interest, in giving inmates the right to vote.
Human rights account for very little in this country, unless a silly PM pulls a waitress’ hair, and even then, nothing much happens. Most people do not care, they are too busy working, earning, paying bills and spending at the malls. Few care to be bothered, and that is NZ Inc 2015, I fear.
I think people do care, but at present there is a disjointed effort.
The carefully planted right wing discourse it just that, people don’t care, but in my opinion, that’s not true.
Human rights have always been big in NZ. But sadly no opposition party seems to be making much of an issue about them, apart from surprisingly, NZ First.
On the left/right spectrum I would think it would be National, NZ First, Labour, Greens but instead on policy it seems to be
National, Labour, NZ First, Greens.
That is a massive vote disrupter that Labour is so far right of centre (and 1/2 MP’s seems to think they need to be further right).
The bizarre thing is that the most suited to be Nats partner is Labour.
This does not seem to appeal to voters though.
Comments are closed.