In response to the discovery of firearms and drugs during searches of gang members’ homes, police minister Mark Mitchell has introduced new powers to search for gang patches.
The coalition government’s latest legislative move, the Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill, has sparked outrage among officials, the Law Society, and opposition groups due to a controversial provision.
Repeat offenders who flout the public gang patch ban will face a severe consequence: a complete ban on all insignia, including those displayed in private residences, even if they belong to others.
The recent legislation targeting gang patches, while intended to curb criminal activity, is a vastly controversial one. It lacks the comprehensive nature of other legislative initiatives of the New Zealand government like the upcoming online casino act.
The Gambling Commission New Zealand is set to introduce a new regulatory framework for online casinos, which is currently in development and expected to be fully implemented by 2026. This will ensure online pokies operate separately from other gambling products such as sportsbooks, and provide increased consumer safety.
The Justice Minister, Paul Goldsmith, initially denied the police’s request for increased powers. However, he has now changed his stance, meaning there will be no opportunity for public input or feedback, as the select committee process has been finalised.
The Police Minister stated that the gang legislation was based on Western Australia’s model, but they have enhanced it and made it more robust.
“The police advice to me is that gang members don’t like having their homes searched, because often there’s other contraband in there – firearms or drugs – and it’s quite simply a matter of, if gangs want to ignore the law, if they don’t want to adhere to it and do that three times, then police have the option to go retrieve that gang insignia,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell declared an end to gang intimidation with patches, asserting that “enough is enough”. Critics of the eleventh-hour clause argue that the new powers would unduly curtail protections enshrined in the Bill of Rights Act.
However, both Mitchell and the Prime Minister remained defiant. Christopher Luxon told Morning Report on Tuesday that gangs have forfeited their rights.
According to Luxon, when a mere quarter of one percent is responsible for nearly a fifth or a quarter of all serious crime, it becomes a significant issue. This suggests a disregard for the responsibilities associated with being a Kiwi, a lack of interest in fulfilling the duties of a New Zealander, and a willingness to inflict pain, suffering, and misery upon fellow New Zealanders. Such behaviour is unacceptable.
Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb expressed deep concern about this incursion into the sanctity of one’s private and personal space, likening it to a veiled attempt to conduct searches and harass individuals.
Webb revealed that officials from the Ministry of Justice had raised similar concerns, suggesting that the provision could be a roundabout way to achieve these ends. He dismissed the notion that the amendment would have any deterrent effect or make a tangible difference, questioning the coalition’s motives for pursuing it.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins also criticised the government’s decision-making as “highly inconsistent”. He argued that the government had failed to provide a compelling justification for the sudden reversal of its stance on gang patches in private homes, particularly given that the wearing of a swastika was still permissible. This inconsistency, Hipkins asserted, made no sense.
Goldsmith was pressed on Monday to justify his decision to amend the legislation. He dismissed concerns, claiming that it was effortlessly avoidable.
“Just don’t get caught three times within five years,” the justice minister replied.