The secret closed trials of Soviet Russia. (And Aotearoa New Zealand)

32
13

.

.

.

History throughout the 20th century is replete with authoritarian regimes using  closed, secret trials to persecute dissidents. Closed, secret trials give a veneer of legal “respectability” to an autocratic regime that wants to do away with its critics, but without giving too much away to the public how they do it.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Or what the defendant might say in his/her defence.

The British conducted secret trials with their “Star Chamber“. From the late 15th century to the mid-17th century, the Star Chamber was a weaponised judicial system to serve the interests of the powerful elite.

Soviet Russia under Stalin perfected the system into an ‘artform’. Trials were secret before public show-trials were made for public consumption.

Often many of these “state enemies” were military officers, party leaders, and functionaries who had fallen “out of favour” with the ruling clique or somehow threatened the status-quo.

Other dissidents – intellectuals, academics, trade unionists, scientists, etc –  engaged in nothing more violent than a ‘ war of words’ and ‘contest of ideas’ with the regime. Autocratic regimes are not noted for tolerating a contest of anything, much less ideas that threaten their legitimacy and monopoly on power.

Thankfully, nothing like closed secret trials happen here in New Zealand, right?

Bad news, folks. We are about to have one. It will involve evidence given in secret, in a closed trial.

And the defendant will not be informed of the evidence against him.

On 28 August 2017, Daily Blog administrator/owner, Martyn Bradbury reported that he has been targetted by a Police search into his banking activities following the release of Nicky Hager’s expose, “Dirty Politics“.

.

.

Martyn stated;

I was applying to extend credit to keep the blog afloat and I kept getting declined.

The extensions of credit weren’t extravagant and the manner in which the declines occurred just seemed odd.

I had followed the Nicky Hager case closely where Police had sent out warrantless requests for information and had obtained that information illegally and had even written a blog myself at the time of how the process of obtaining that information by Police could damage peoples credit rating and had even hypothesised that the Police could abuse this by targeting activists they didn’t like out of spite.

I don’t know why, but I felt suspicious and so wrote to the Banking Ombudsman and asked for access to my banking files to see if there was any 3rd person interaction.

The Banking Ombudsman replied early this year, and to my shock, I found out that the Police had, as part of their 2014 investigation into Nicky Hager, sent every bank in NZ a request for information claiming ‘Computer Fraud’.

The material released showed that before I was declined on my credit applications, each one had been referred in the first instance to the Banks computer fraud unit because the Police request red flagged my account.

Once I had discovered this, I requested information from the NZ Police into why they had secretly included me in the Nicky Hager investigation. They responded that while that had sent the requests, they wouldn’t tell me why.

Following police refusal to disclose why they had been secretly investigating him, the stress took a serious toll on his mental health. Police had effectively convicted Martyn a “computer fraudster” without the usual trial process.

Martyn took matters further;

I sent all the material I had from the Banking Ombudsman including the Police request and response to the Privacy Commission and lodged a compliant regarding the Police actions.

The Privacy Commission have just finished their investigation and found that not only did the Police breach my privacy, they also breached my civil rights by effectively conducting an illegal search.

The Privacy Commissioner found in Martyn’s favour;

Earlier this year, blogger Martyn Bradbury made a complaint to our office about a request from Police to his bank for information about him. We investigated that complaint, and recently sent him our final view on the matter.

Among other things, we concluded that Police had collected his information in an unlawful way by asking for such sensitive information without first putting the matter before a judicial officer. Our view is that this was a breach of Principle 4 of the Privacy Act, which forbids agencies from collecting information in an unfair, unreasonable or unlawful way.

Our investigation, as with all our investigations, only addressed the facts of this case. We concluded that Police action in this case constituted an interference with Mr Bradbury’s privacy.

The “judicial officer” that Privacy Commissioner John Edwards referred to is a Court judge.

In November 2017, Privacy Commissioner John Edwards issued a guidance statement “on releasing personal information to law enforcement agencies”. The Commissioner said,

“A number of different areas of our work have demonstrated the need for better information to be made available to companies and individuals about the circumstances in which personal information can be released and used for law enforcement purposes.”

Martyn took that decision to the Human Rights Review Tribunal (HRRT). He said,  “they will process my complaint against the Police for breaching my privacy and civil rights through unlawful search. It’s not important to like or dislike my work, but I think we can all agree that allowing the Police to conduct secret investigations into activists and political bloggers that then damage their reputation negatively based on spurious grounds isn’t acceptable in a liberal democracy“.

Among the cases taken by the HRRT was a prosecution on behalf of businessman Matthew Blomfield against right-wing blogger Cameron Slater. The hearing for case was completed three years ago. (Blomfield won.)

On 12 June 2018, Police admitted liability in their October 2014 unlawful  search of Nicky Hager’s home. They made an apology and paid “substantial” restitution for considerable  harm caused to the journalist.

.

.

David Fisher from the NZ Herald reported;

Investigative journalist Nicky Hager has accepted a police apology and payment of “substantial damages” after the unlawful search of his home during the investigation into the hacking that led to the Dirty Politics book.

The settlement revealed police had sought information claiming Hager was suspected of criminal behaviour, including fraud.

“Police accept that they had no basis for such allegations,” the settlement document read.

“Police apologise unreservedly for these breaches of his rights and have agreed to pay Mr Hager substantial damages and a contribution towards his legal costs.”

Martyn Bradbury was not so fortunate. Police refused to admit liability for their illegal search of Martyn’s bank accounts. He was forced to pursue his case further;

“…now that (Nickey Hager’s claim] has been finally settled, here is my statement to the NZ Police regarding my case against them for dragging me into this pus pit…

“You shredded my credit rating to every major bank in NZ by claiming I was a computer fraudster, caused me huge personal anguish and seized my banking records all for a case against Nicky Hager that you have now admitted you were wrong in proceeding with in the first place. I had nothing to do with hacking Cameron Slater’s computer and yet my case still sits in front of the Human Rights Review Tribunal despite the Privacy Commissioner recommending my rights have been breached.

It’s time to settle my case now.” 

…once the abuses of power have been settled, and the damages paid, THEN we should start asking how many other people have been caught out by this and who set the Police on this politically influenced investigation in the first place.”

In March this year, despite a massive caseload and under-funding that was hampering their mandated role, the Human Rights Review Tribunal announced they will finally hear Martyn’s case. The hearing is scheduled to take place in July and expected to last three days.

On 31 March, NZ Herald’s David Fisher published a story outlining impending Martyn’s case before the Human Rights Review Tribunal;

.

.

Fisher also reported the extraordinary demand from Police that key evidence be presented in secret;

“Police indicate at this stage that it will seek to invoke the “closed” hearing process in relation to information relevant to this claim.”

According to Martyn, neither he nor his lawyer will be able to hear evidence presented at the HRRT hearing. In  emailed statements, Martyn told this blogger;

…The NZ Police intend to hold part of the trial in secret using secret evidence I am not allowed to see. Part of the trial will be open, part of it closed and held in secret.

My Human Rights Review Tribunal court case into how the police illegally seized my bank records as part of their failed Nicky Hager case  finally was granted a hearing to proceed and the Police announced that they would be demanding part of the trial is closed and held in secret using secret evidence I can’t see or challenge.

As stated above, this is all but unprecedented in Aotearoa New Zealand’s legal history.

A day after David Fisher’s story, Thomas Beagle from the NZ Council on Civil Liberties condemned the use of secret evidence in closed courts;

Let’s be clear about what secret evidence is. It’s not evidence that can’t be reported in the media, and it’s not evidence where the judge clears the court of all people not directly participating in the trial.

Secret evidence is evidence that the defendant, the person accused of the crime, is not allowed to see or hear, and therefore cannot challenge. The use of secret evidence makes a mockery of our justice system.

[…]

How can we trust the people keeping the evidence secret? While the courts may assert their independence from government, to the defendant they’re just another part of the government apparatus that’s going to put them in jail without the chance to defend themselves.

The only other (known) use of secret evidence took place in early 2018 when a secret trial, in unusually strict security,  took place in Wellington’s High Court.

Thomas Beagle was scathing at the time;

The right to a fair trial is a key part of our justice system and this must include the right to see and test the evidence against you. It’s impossible to rebut evidence when you don’t even know what it says. It’s hard to even appeal when the judgement against you omits critical details that the decision relied upon.

Appointing an advocate and letting the judge see the information is all very well, but as far as the defendant is concerned it’s just one part of the state telling her that she can trust other parts of the state. This is no comfort when it’s the state acting against you in the first place.

[…]

We’re told the secrecy is for “security reasons” but secret trials with secret evidence are a much more significant threat to our security and liberty.

We need to stop accepting the use of secret evidence in our courts, it has no place in a free and democratic society.

 

Judge Dobson, who adjudicated the original 2018 secret trial was equally disturbed at the secrecy, calling it “an anathema to the fundamental concepts of fairness“.

In his more recent article, Thomas Beagle listed only four laws in Aotearoa New Zealand that permit the use of secret evidence:

  • Health & Safety at Work Act 2015 has schedule 4 concerning the use of secret evidence in labour disputes with employees of agencies handling classified information.
  • Immigration Act 2009 where sections 33-42 and 240-244 are for the use of secret evidence in immigration decisions.
  • Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Act 2013 has sections 101 – 113 for the use of secret evidence in offences concerning intercepting communications for the spy agencies.
  • Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 where section 38 is for the use of secret evidence in offences under this act.

It is unclear how Martyn’s illegal seizure of his personal bank records is permitted under any of those four Acts.

Even worse is the realisation that it is not Martyn who is defending himself against criminal charges. It is the Police who are on trial for mis-using their powers by breaching a person’s privacy without due regard to the laws of this country.

The police over-stepped and mis-used their powers of search and seizure. It was an illegal action, as Privacy Commissioner John Edwards stated with searing clarity, “that Police had collected his information in an unlawful way”.

Against this backdrop of over-zealousness at best and cynical illegality at worst, that Martyn is now expected to trust any evidence that the Police will offer at the HRRT hearing? Evidence that the Police will use to defend themselves? Evidence that Martyn will not be permitted to determine the validity of?

The Police misrepresented their case when they seized Martyn’s bank records. We will have no way of knowing if they will again attempt to misrepresent their case at the HRRT review.

This is absurd. It is also disturbing.

As Judge Dobson pointed out, the use of secret evidence in closed trials is anathema to the concept of a fair trial. As Thomas Beagle stated, “it has no place in a free and democratic society”.

So why are we, as a nation, permitting it?

On 24 March, this blogger wrote on the matter of the alleged Christchurch shooter’s impending trial;

Yet, conducting [his] trial in secret is also not a solution.

Secrecy breeds suspicion. It would give birth to a host of mind-numbingly tedious conspiracy theories. Salient information about his actions would be lost. It would create dangerous legal precedent.

If the alleged terrorist and mass-murderer of fifty innocent people has the right to a fair and open trial – on what grounds is the same right denied to a left-wing blogger who has committed no crime whatsoever? Remember, it is the Police on trial, not Martyn Bradbury.

This blogger will be sending this story to the Minister for Justice and Justice spokespeople from National, Greens, and NZ First.

But especially this story will be brought to Andrew Little’s attention. The secret trial of Martyn Bradbury is being done under the Minister’s watch.

Not a very good look, is it?

Time to put a stop to this Kafkaesque fiasco, Minister Little.

.

Postscript

This story emailed to the following:

 

.

.

.

References

Wikipedia: Star Chamber

Encyclopaedia Britannica: Purge Trials

Privacy Commissioner: Statement clarifying Martyn Bradbury’s privacy complaint

NZ Law Society: Privacy Commissioner issues guidance on personal information and transparency reporting

Justice Dept: IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2019] NZHRRT 13

NZ Herald: Police pay Nicky Hager ‘substantial damages’ for unlawful search of his home in hunt for Dirty Politics hacker

NZ Herald: Huge delays at Human Rights Tribunal as cases pile up

NZ Herald: ‘Secret’ evidence in closed hearing – how police want to defend access of blogger’s details without a legal warrant

NZ Council for Civil Liberties: Secret evidence is unjust and should be banned

Radio NZ: Hearing shrouded in secrecy at High Court in Wgtn

NZ Council for Civil Liberties: Secret evidence unacceptable

Additional

NZ Herald: Hunt for Rawshark sees police rapped again for ‘unlawful’ search of banking records

Other Blogs

The Standard: Bomber Bradbury wins privacy complaint against Police (28 August 2017)

The Daily Blog: Bryan Bruce – Good Cop. Bad Cop

The Daily Blog: My case against a secret NZ Police investigation that breached my privacy and my civil rights (28 August 2017)

The Daily Blog: My statement to the NZ Police now they have settled the illegal persecution of Nicky Hager (12 June 2018)

The Daily Blog: The Human Rights Review Tribunal FINALLY will hear my case against the NZ Police ( 7 March 2019)

The Daily Blog: Secret police trials using secret evidence in NZ – welcome to my Kafkaesque nightmare (31 March 2019)

Previous related blogposts

The Christchurch Attack: is the stage set for a continuing domino of death?

.

.

.

.

.

= fs =

32 COMMENTS

  1. While the government has succeeded in repairing New Zealand’s Clean Green image there are new forms of corruptions rising. If police or spy’s or who ever want more powers then laws around corruption, official information request have to be strengthened so that documents can be seized and the burden of proof falls on the state to show that bureaucracy isn’t being paranoid and drunk on power. Vigilance by parliament and strict adherence to anti corruption laws while independent police conduct authorities is strengthened and the security and intelligence ombudsman is strengthened to follow up every complaint. This latest case is a new form of corruption where police seek to hide there misdoings from the public. There is no end to human ingenuity.

    • “…While the government has succeeded in repairing New Zealand’s Clean Green image there are new forms of corruptions rising…”

      With respect. No they’re not. There’s nothing new about all manner of corruptions in AO/NZ. In fact, if one were to remove all corruptions from AO/NZ you’d be left with a wafer thin wisp of a thing looking something like a mosquito emaciated and anaemic from a lack of dubious sustenance.
      To subvert and paraphrase the awesome Tika Waititi; Not only is AO/ NZ racist as fuck, it’s also corrupt as fuck. Some of you are simply shocked at suddenly realising that while I, as a rich, handsome and erudite fellow with an appendage the envy of any donkey, thinks the “ OMG! ( Whilst finger-fanning ) AO/NZ! ? Corrupt! ? Nooooooo!!!??? “ thing’s all a bit “ Wot eva…! “
      BTW? Seen ANZ Jonk-E on RNZ running his little gob off for NO CGT’s “Thanks and cheers but no”? Baha ahahhaha ahaha a !
      Dear old dirty old RNZ huh?
      What have I been writing all these years? Honestly? You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

      • Then why did the lefts political funny bone just disappear during John Key or even Helen Clark. Those where depressing years and I’ll tell you why – political correctness went the wrong way. Political correctness went the wrong way with manners and that no one is allowed to be offended. Could you imagine getting fucked every which way from gays to trans and lesbians and having the manners to not to offend anyone, it’s ridiculous, so speech laws must be regulated hard, we need committee to decide what forms of having sexual relations is offensive so we know who to make fun of.

        Another point is these Woke PC culture radical outrage Olympics lefties must be made aware that they are responsible for electing Trump. The stupidity of the woke left and their outrage Olympics was the key factor in electing Trump and for the popularity of Trump among ordinary people. And there continued claims of Russia did it and Killary didn’t do it and muh speech lore is so humiliating.

        Trump questions everything we stand for. But the reaction is hysterical, for this I admire him, he’s so honest about his vices and you can see what makes him tick just from his Twitter. No other president has ever been so honest. It’s this freedom model to choose that needs to be questioned. Americans where given a choice between Hillary and Trump but why them, why not Bernie Sanders. So the question of choice must always be asked because even those 3 choices are very limited. Why not ask but what about Tulsi Gabbard and so on and so fourth. Freedom of choice. On the one hand I’m not a total liberal so I wouldn’t have sex with another male but I would take a full surgically assigned tyranny for a test drive and then who knows. Racist jokes and sex jokes are not funny for persecuted people but they can be made jokes of when it isn’t about racism or sexiest.

        These are what I would be attentional too. The attempts at freedoms can be a form of cutting freedoms and control freedoms, attempts to save the others dignity can be a form of aggressiveness and so on. So we can not simply accept / adopt standard institutional virtue signalling. There is no simple formula here and any one giving simple answers to complex problems should be treated with appropriate amounts of irony. So yeah, almost anything that goes political wrong can be blamed on the woke left.

  2. Secret evidence has no place in NZ!

    Especially in this case!

    It is pretty much a sign that there will not be justice and lies told by power interests to save them being accountable for their actions in the eyes of the law and the public.

    Another secret trial going on around the world, the murder of Jamal Khashoggi!

    Is that elements of the justice system we want to emulate in NZ?

    Even worse Andrew Little has also been at the mercy of power interests pursuing him over his comments about the Hagamans which made him under investigation NOT the people and criminal case that should have been investigated by the justice system! So our laws have been shifted by power interests to attack those who use freedom of speech which in NZ is increasingly not allowed!

  3. Yes, so appalling this is. Also note how useless our Privacy Commissioner is, under a weak law, constructed like a Swiss Cheese full of holes you can drive a truck through.

    He can express ‘concerns’ and make warnings, and those suffering privacy breaches can take a case to the HRRT. The latter though only succeeds in few cases.

    Most privacy issues get swept under the carpet, as the law is so weak. It is even much, much worse with the Health and Disability Commissioner and the law that Commissioner works under.

    That one is like a true gatekeeper for complaints about anything to do with health and disability issues. And most complaints are not even investigated.

    I guess Martyn only got as far as he did, given his profile and position as an outspoken, controversial blogger. Had he been one of us faceless common people, he would not even have got a hearing, I suspect.

    It will be very interesting to see what will come out of all this.

    It is an affront to natural justice principles and the law in general, but our statutes protect police and other state agencies from so much, while the ‘watchdogs’ are mostly useless.

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2016/09/05/the-new-zealand-ombudsman-underfunded-and-compromised-the-auditor-general-sees-no-need-for-action/

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2016/07/24/the-new-zealand-ombudsman-fairness-for-all-an-empty-slogan-for-some/

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2017/11/21/how-the-new-zealand-ombudsman-effectively-provides-cover-for-the-hdc-an-information-request-complaint-case/

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/how-the-n-z-ombudsman-effectively-provides-cover-for-the-hdc-report-post-28-11-17.pdf

    But as most people are so busy with their small lives matters and worries, they never come to think of what really goes on in this country, ‘too busy’, and left too much in the dark.

    • The NZ Police need to come clean and advise the Courts who instructed them to start delving into Mr Bradbury’s Financial Affairs ?

      If it smells like a Rat it probably is a Rat ?

      • Its a gnat rat one of the worst kinds of rats in Aotearoa why do you think key resigned apart from many dumb Nzders started to see him for who he really was a big fat gnat rat selling us down the proverbial toilet. And that rat got a knighthood.

        • Sadly so many Kiwis are suckers, they fall for the MSM propaganda and cling to their suburban lifestyles in a consumerist world, where nothing much matters that does not serve their immediate instincts (which are short sighted and ignore so much).

          Key bought their loyalty, that is enough supported him, because he promised to make them a little ‘richer’ with the properties they own, the cars they drive and with businesses that are in fact rather unsustainable in a world that must move fast away from fossil fuel use.

  4. Re The Bradbury Case I believe the NZ Police were under Political Directives, the NZ Police were being used as an arm of the Government for Political Purposes ?

    • If it was, Ngungukai,no wonder the police want a closed court with secret evidence. Something stinks here and I think the msm maybe overlooking something big here.

    • I agree, Ngungukai. Learned today that Microsoft has a snoop program called “Orifice” !! which allows entry into computers even while they are in use. And of course, every government would employ its own Snooper..for national security purposes of course.

  5. Excellent summary to link it all up for us readers Frank, thanks for your hard work.

    Is this case the final sting in the tail of the “Dirty Politics” saga as related to the Whale blog/Key PM’s Dept. carry on? Maybe. Someone amongst the “authorities” certainly has it in for Martyn Bradbury.

    As I have said in another thread on TBD, quite often secrecy claimed by state security agencies and Police units is simply to prevent the identity of informants, and or political interference, becoming public knowledge.

    On this occasion “Kafkaesque” is not hyperbole–it is the awful mind bending reality. Look at the opaque bureaucratic maze Martyn has had to negotiate–and as you point out–he is not even on bloody trial!

    • I think that “secret informant” is often merely a euphemism for an illegal surveillance, and the safety of this informant is really safety of their secret spying operations (this covers quite a range – international assistance to get aroubnd local rules, corporate contractors, official but not sanctioned fishing operations, well resourced work by off duty, present and or past, staff, private networks funded by business/other organised groups etc ).

      • Yes, the ultimate effect of such secrecy is to terminate the “trail”, rendering all people and groups involved in the surveilling hard, if not impossible to trace, and of course unaccountable.

      • “I think that “secret informant” is often merely a euphemism for an illegal surveillance, and the safety of this informant is really safety of their secret spying operations”

        Nailed it SPC

        If the evidence is so damning of Martyn abd shows tge Police in a good light, they’d be rushing to make it public to rub Martyn’s nose in it

        Butvtge fact they’re trying to keep it secret indicates something illegal or unethical at least has occurred

        As supporters of the SIS, Police, and GCSB used to say when arguing to extend their surveillance powers, “nothing to hide, nothing to fear”

        So, what are the cops hiding and what do they fear????

  6. This whole mess was orchestrated as a witch hunt by the National party and its friends in the police.
    The privacy law has let Bomber down and unless it is strengthened it will fail others that want to hold a future National government to account.
    It seems to me that Bomber is too be made an example of as the case against Hagar was lost and they are no closer to finding Rawshark which Key and his henchman would love too see exposed for damaging the legacy of the man who walks on water.
    This is another example of how dangerous the last National government was in attempting too destroy through the powers of the state its enemies and critics.
    Good to see that you now have legal representation Bomber and i hope this stays in the public arena.
    I think the following by Thomas Beagle sums up the entire situation !

    The right to a fair trial is a key part of our justice system and this must include the right to see and test the evidence against you. It’s impossible to rebut evidence when you don’t even know what it says. It’s hard to even appeal when the judgement against you omits critical details that the decision relied upon.

    Appointing an advocate and letting the judge see the information is all very well, but as far as the defendant is concerned it’s just one part of the state telling her that she can trust other parts of the state. This is no comfort when it’s the state acting against you in the first place.

    […]

    We’re told the secrecy is for “security reasons” but secret trials with secret evidence are a much more significant threat to our security and liberty.

    We need to stop accepting the use of secret evidence in our courts, it has no place in a free and democratic society.

    Great work Frank.

    • “We’re told the secrecy is for “security reasons”…”.

      The security of whom?

      Let’s cut to the chase. The police and others acted on a ‘request’ from the former prime minister’s office. I refer of course to John Key and his staff of henchmen and women.

      It is they who are being afforded protection.

      Hackneyed though it maybe, it is yet the latest example of the meme:

      There is one law for us, and another for the rest of you.

  7. What. The. Fuck???

    So let me get this straight. Martyn’s not on trial, the cops are. Martyn’s not defending himself against allegations of wrong doing, the cops are

    AND THE COPS ARE ALLOWED TO GET AWAY WITH PRESENTING SECRET EVIDENCE IN A CLOSED COURT?????

    When the bejeezus did we wake up in fecking Nth Korea???

    Andrew Little!!! What the hell is going on???

    (PS – Excellent blog Frank)

  8. Gorblimey!

    Lavrenti Beria still lives…

    Interesting that the NZ Police choose to model themselves on the fascist style rather than the communist one.

    What’s next? A Kiwi Hitler?

    Bomber, can you put up a link for financial support please?

  9. “Star Chambers” -right to the dark heart of the matter, as usual. Rather disappointed that “Scoop”, Campbell et al have not taken up this travesty of
    ‘justice”. We will be watching. Remember well in ’81 & ’85 during Springbok Tour activities, that our phone was very obviously tapped and most likely illegally.

  10. Exactly Mjolnir. The cops have manipulated the narrative and the system to turn the victim into being the villain and themselves, the villians, into being the victim. And even though the Privacy Commissioner and even a Judge have considered their actions to be illegal the cops still try to justify their actions although now behind closed doors wanting us to think that Martyn really is the villain and they are protecting us, the unsuspecting public, against some sort of evil we should not know about.

    So yet again, the cops are saying – we are right and even if we are wrong we are still right.

    Why is it that when a cop is convicted of a crime the cops crow from the tree-tops that they are transparent and accountable to the public and that do not cover up their own members’ misdeeds, yet here when the very people that are crowing to the public are the ones who have done wrong, they are not being transparent nor accountable to the public.

    A simple yes, we did wrong to Martyn, we are sorry and we will compensate you would go a long way in fixing this but that’s not going to happen is it?

  11. If NZ Govt or the Police want to track/trace anyone’s info, personal or not, it’s there for the asking. Knowing this is it any wonder this farce needs to be in camera. But of course, being a noteworthy blogger, the victim needs to be kept absent and ignorant about how the information is obtained. But we all know. Netanyahu said it himself. He’s a Rothschild boy just like sirjokey and these world stage players made sure that whatever we put into our computer shoots along the lines straight into the lap of their watchdogs.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1uiwJ3m9KM
    If you think the eye spy game is bad now wait for 5G. It’s the ultimate weapon.

  12. POTENT POST FRANK

    Apropos my post below
    https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2019/04/04/guest-blog-ross-meurant-who-rules-this-country/

    TWO POINTS I MAKE:
    Government sets policy.
    For all ministries and departments.

    The problem I address above is, that in the minister’s office when discussion occurs, bureaucrats push their agenda for policy.
    EG Reduce fish quota catches because the stats show the resource is declining. This I suggest is an objective contribution to the minister for him/her to take to cabinet where policy will be decided.
    EG We need more power for surveillance because we suspect bad things in Tuhoe or the Daily Blog. This is a subjective contribution to a minister who takes that stuff to cabinet.

    CEO’s (Commissioners etc) have Operational Omnipotence in how they implement the policies cabinet approve (often on the advice and urging of bureaucrats – as described above.
    Minister have no license to interfere in Operational matters.

    ONLY THE COURTS can sanction CEO’s or Ministries – when things get out of hand – e.g. Dot Com’s raids (an Operational decision)deemed illegal by the Court.

    NOW we have police wanting a closed session Court- so their faults cannot be seen by the public.

    Is this as bad or worse than police not having to front a Court for the culpability of their killing of 36 people since the year I joined the police.

    A bad day at the Mill, mate. A very bad trend – in my view.

    PS
    I have a novel due out Dad’s Day.
    OUT OF THE INFERNO

    I penned it (a novel- make believe of course) 6 months ago.

    Now, I wonder whether GCSB were reading my drafts in my computer.
    ALSO apropos my post below Who

    • Thanks, Ross.

      I appreciate your insight into the shadowy workings of the bureaucracy. I thoroughly concur with your (and others who’ve made the same) comment;

      “NOW we have police wanting a closed session Court- so their faults cannot be seen by the public.”

      I wish you well with your book launch.

  13. Dangerous stuff going on in the past National Government under the Rothschild’s poster boy Sr John Key, Stazi like activity in NZ Government Departments ?

    Time for a Clean Out me thinks ?

  14. Reflect that any legislation censuring free speech will mostly be utilised like this, by the agents of the state. And for similar political purposes.
    I concur with J S Bark. Put up a support link.

    Personally I think people should assume that the police (and other banks) have access to your financial information if they want it whether they are legally entitled to it or not. It usually can’t hurt even if it is none of their business. Records of land ownership , shares, fishing quota etc. etc . are public records so anyone can find out what anyone is worth. The damage that was done to Martyn was in making him seem a bad risk to the banks.
    I better remember to contribute.
    D J S

  15. The police comment admitting looking under the wrong rocks springs to mind, let alone the wrong pebbles. Are they embarrassed? Surely that can’t be the reason they want a closed trial. I would like to know why the banks are not compelled to notify their clients if they are requested to give over information to the authorities.

    • If this were Amerika, Lone Comet, Martyn could be suing his bank for $1 billion bucks

      Plus the shirts of the backs of the Board of Directors

      But this is Un Zud. Time to pull out the dampened bus ticket

  16. Once more will be revealed, once the hearings and trials may be over, then this will be stuff for a movie, a good one.

    Start writing the script, Mr Bradbury.

    In years to come your financial woes may be well over.

  17. Can’t have your cake -and eat it too.
    Shame shame shame.
    Poor Martyn – a “liberal” lol , not realising that “liberal” leads to Communism & Police state.

    Hope the rest of you’s wake up. What a damn shame none of you can see the big picture. NZ isn’t a li’l country all on its own. If you stopped relying on the telly for “info” like kiddies, and did some independent outside research to see whats happening overseas you’d recognise the true status quo.

    • Cassie. You are a nut.

      Thank you for staying with me on my lengthy, considered observation of you.

      Cheers.

Comments are closed.