The Daily Blog Open Mic – 11th October 2022

Catch-up Corner.
On the NZ 7-year wipe slate clean law. The benefits of having honest, informed people with overseas quality credentials providing expertise is obvious.
[Dr Oliver Hartwich is the executive director of The New Zealand Initiative (www.nzinitiative.org.nz). He holds a doctorate in law from the University of Bochum (Germany) and provided an affidavit for,,,,, to support his licensing application.]

( Just don’t let Joanne Harrisons in please. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300036021/vices-vanity-fantasy-joanne-harrison-fraud-saga-highlights-calls-for-publics-right-to-know-about-serial-con-artists) It isn’t wrong to have juxtaposition of those two dissimilar persons at the extremes of personal integrity, because we have to be judicious about how we see OE as automatically glamorous, and perhaps worth extra cash to sourcing agencies.

https://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/opinion/the-vexing-issue-of-damien-grants-career-ending-convictions/
My doctoral thesis was on a comparative law subject, and I find it fascinating to compare legal systems.

Here, though [NZ citizen under scrutiny for criminal behaviour] would have never guessed, he is unlucky not to be German. Because had his case unfolded in Germany, he would not need to worry about his professional future – or the future of his employees and family.

In some ways, New Zealand is quite a progressive country when it comes to dealing with ex-criminals. In 2004, the Clark Government introduced the Clean Slate Act. It makes it possible for reformed offenders to move on from their past after seven years of good behaviour. When asked about past convictions, they can say then that they have none.

The Clean Slate Act was crafted with the best intentions, and seven years is quite a low number by international standards. But, as is so often the case in the law, terms and conditions apply.
The most problematic one is this: once sentenced to imprisonment, the Clean Slate Act is no longer available to you. It does not matter if your prison sentence was seven, 17 or 26 years ago…

Like New Zealand, Germany maintains a register for criminal convictions. And just like in New Zealand, a federal law prescribes that after specified times, entries from the register must be deleted.
The difference is this: the length of time depends on the severity of the crimes. A life sentence, for example, will never get deleted. Prison sentences up to three months usually disappear after five years; prison sentences up to one year are gone after 10 years; everything else is gone after 15 years. Again, some T&Cs apply.

We seem to have trouble recovering from hiccups. We could do with introducing a sensible method, or indeed having less irrelevant laws to break in some cases. We can stop concentrating on stoning any caught law-breaker (I am using hyperbole here I know but you probably get the point). They should get some sort of punishment requiring remediation, rethinking, examining their attitude, which if not carried out results in a further sentence probably, jail term. Keeping them at home with a non-roaming bracelet as if they were dogs, doesn’t meet the criteria for self-examination, rethinking. I think we slip too easily into a self-aggrandisement approach ie, feeling pure and presenting ourselves and our society as above lawbreaking, so the present miscreant must be severely treated so as to stamp out his unheard-of behaviour. And that’s the ill-considered feeling, not rational, behind our lofty law upholders at all levels.

6 COMMENTS

Greywarbler October 11, 2022 At 11:54 am

Catch-up Corner.
On the NZ 7-year wipe slate clean law. The benefits of having honest, informed people with overseas quality credentials providing expertise is obvious.
[Dr Oliver Hartwich is the executive director of The New Zealand Initiative (www.nzinitiative.org.nz). He holds a doctorate in law from the University of Bochum (Germany) and provided an affidavit for,,,,, to support his licensing application.]

( Just don’t let Joanne Harrisons in please. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/300036021/vices-vanity-fantasy-joanne-harrison-fraud-saga-highlights-calls-for-publics-right-to-know-about-serial-con-artists) It isn’t wrong to have juxtaposition of those two dissimilar persons at the extremes of personal integrity, because we have to be judicious about how we see OE as automatically glamorous, and perhaps worth extra cash to sourcing agencies.

https://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/opinion/the-vexing-issue-of-damien-grants-career-ending-convictions/
My doctoral thesis was on a comparative law subject, and I find it fascinating to compare legal systems.

Here, though [NZ citizen under scrutiny for criminal behaviour] would have never guessed, he is unlucky not to be German. Because had his case unfolded in Germany, he would not need to worry about his professional future – or the future of his employees and family.

In some ways, New Zealand is quite a progressive country when it comes to dealing with ex-criminals. In 2004, the Clark Government introduced the Clean Slate Act. It makes it possible for reformed offenders to move on from their past after seven years of good behaviour. When asked about past convictions, they can say then that they have none.

The Clean Slate Act was crafted with the best intentions, and seven years is quite a low number by international standards. But, as is so often the case in the law, terms and conditions apply.
The most problematic one is this: once sentenced to imprisonment, the Clean Slate Act is no longer available to you. It does not matter if your prison sentence was seven, 17 or 26 years ago…

Like New Zealand, Germany maintains a register for criminal convictions. And just like in New Zealand, a federal law prescribes that after specified times, entries from the register must be deleted.
The difference is this: the length of time depends on the severity of the crimes. A life sentence, for example, will never get deleted. Prison sentences up to three months usually disappear after five years; prison sentences up to one year are gone after 10 years; everything else is gone after 15 years. Again, some T&Cs apply.

We seem to have trouble recovering from hiccups. We could do with introducing a sensible method, or indeed having less irrelevant laws to break in some cases. We can stop concentrating on stoning any caught law-breaker (I am using hyperbole here I know but you probably get the point). They should get some sort of punishment requiring remediation, rethinking, examining their attitude, which if not carried out results in a further sentence probably, jail term. Keeping them at home with a non-roaming bracelet as if they were dogs, doesn’t meet the criteria for self-examination, rethinking. I think we slip too easily into a self-aggrandisement approach ie, feeling pure and presenting ourselves and our society as above lawbreaking, so the present miscreant must be severely treated so as to stamp out his unheard-of behaviour. And that’s the ill-considered feeling, not rational, behind our lofty law upholders at all levels.
OnceWasTim October 11, 2022 At 1:26 pm

This:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2022/10/closing-revolving-door.html

But then of course there’ll need for an ‘independent’ template-driven EY advice by way of a white paper, and several pieces of work by officials from various agencies before any decisions can be made. And of course several weeks of consultations with the stakeholders involved (Joe Public being at the bottom of the queue).

Comments are closed.

Contribute

6 COMMENTS