Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Govt must not intrude on courts

Collapse
X
Collapse
  •  

  • Govt must not intrude on courts-Judith Collins

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Judith Collins.jpeg
Views:	1
Size:	6.1 KB
ID:	24946

    Justice Minister Judith Collins explains why it would be wrong for her to intervene to
    review the conviction of Teina Pora for the rape and murder of Susan Burdett. Her argument that it would be unconstitutionally safe for her to intervene, is in sharp contrast to recent lobbying by judges to influence Parliament over the judges pecuniary interests bill and new Family Court legislation

    New Zealand has one of the best-performing justice systems in the world. It has minimal corruption, a strong judiciary and high public confidence in its institutions.New Zealand consistently ranks at the top of Transparency International's corruption perception index for having one of the least corrupt, most transparent governments.

    The separation of powers - between the executive and the judiciary - is at the heart of democracy. It ensures that power does not concentrate in one branch of government. Decisions about criminal responsibility are made by the courts. Every convicted person can appeal against conviction and sentence. The appeal courts ensure the trial process was fair, evidence was properly admitted or excluded, and the verdict is not unreasonable.

    The appeal courts, including the Privy Council, may quash a conviction, order a retrial or amend a sentence. Recent reports surrounding Teina Pora's convictions suggest there is confusion on two issues - the options available to review Pora's convictions, and options available to address broader concerns about how his case was handled.

    For Pora's sake, the priority must be on the options available to review his convictions. Pora was convicted at a retrial in 2000 for the murder, rape and aggravated burglary of Susan Burdett. His appeal against those convictions to the Court of Appeal was unsuccessful. The remaining avenues available to overturn his convictions are either a further appeal to the Privy Council or the exercise of the royal prerogative of mercy (or a pardon).

    Pora filed an application for the royal prerogative of mercy in September 2011. At this time, his lawyer advised that the application was incomplete but that he was gathering further evidence. The application for a royal prerogative of mercy is an inquiry, which may involve the appointment of an independent person such as a retired High Court judge or Queen's Counsel.

    The royal prerogative of mercy is a longstanding and constitutionally recognised process in which the executive branch of government can intervene in criminal cases. It provides a special avenue for a convicted person to seek a review of his or her case where a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. The governor-general may grant a pardon or refer the matter back to the courts for reconsideration. That is also why, if Pora goes to the Privy Council, his appeal should be completed before any consideration is given to exercising the royal prerogative of mercy.

    At the moment, the Ministry of Justice is administering 12 applications for pardons and three applications for compensation claims. Pora's application for the royal prerogative of mercy remains open and his lawyer is seeking leave to appeal to the Privy Council.
    There are separate avenues for investigating broader concerns about how Pora's case was handled. Where there are allegations of police misconduct, complaints can be made at any stage to the Independent Police Conduct Authority. Other avenues include a ministerial inquiry or commission of inquiry. However, importantly for Pora, these mechanisms do not have the power to overturn convictions.

    The executive branch of government must not intervene in the court process. If the Government needs to institute a wider inquiry as to what went wrong, it should be done only after the court has first answered the question of whether something did go wrong.

    The case of Arthur Allan Thomas is an example of where a royal commission of inquiry was established to look into a criminal case. Mr Thomas applied for the royal prerogative of mercy after he exhausted his appeal rights. It was only after Mr Thomas received a pardon that a royal commission of inquiry was set up by the Government to determine what had gone wrong and issues of compensation. It was not an inquiry into whether Mr Thomas was properly convicted.

    At the time of the royal commission of inquiry regarding Mr Thomas, the Independent Police Conduct Authority was not in place and therefore not available to investigate police actions. As Minister of Justice, I take seriously any suggestions that something went wrong in the criminal justice system. I am satisfied that there are appropriate options available to address any concerns about Pora's case.

    I cannot rule out the possibility of a broader inquiry into the circumstances leading to Pora's convictions once any legal proceedings involving his convictions are resolved. In the meantime, it would be constitutionally unsound for me, as a minister of the Crown, to intervene in the court process.

    • John "Brockovich"
      #1
      John "Brockovich" commented
      Editing a comment
      "The executive branch of government must not intervene in the court process" BULLSHIT; It will and does when it wants to, as below:

      In the District Courts in Hamilton and Wellington the Solicitor-General and his Deputies, using the Attorney-General's statutory authority, blocked the criminal prosecutions of Crown Prosecutors and of themselves for perverting the course of justice.

      That is the executive branch of Government intervening in the Court process. Judith Collins, as usual, lying.
      Last edited by John "Brockovich"; 20-08-2013, 04:02 PM.

    • 1victim
      #2
      1victim commented
      Editing a comment
      Is this a photo of Judith answering the citizens opposed to her corruption ?

      Originally posted by Yoda
      100% Pure Propaganda
      100% correct !!!

      How long before New Zealanders unite against this extreme corruption ???

      1victim

    • flimflam
      #3
      flimflam commented
      Editing a comment
      The courts must not interfere in government matters and government must not interfere In court matters.

      So 205 judges lobby parliament re the pecunary interests bill. So judges are at arms length from politics. Who believes that? Who actually believes it - I don't.

      Who actually watches tv one news or reads the Dom Post, not me for fear of catching propaganda.

      Who believes the family court is not gender baisd - not me but the propaganda says it treats people the same.

      Why does the courts need Neil Billington, why do they need a spin doctor?
    Posting comments is disabled.

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • Judge Goddard refuses to answer MPs' questions
    by admin
    The former New Zealand judge who headed a UK inquiry into child sexual abuse has said she will not appear before British MPs to answer questions about her time in charge. Dame Lowell Goddard said for her to be summoned would compromise the inquiry's "independence and integrity". She also hit out at "malicious, defamatory attacks" by the British media and said she was disappointed the government had not defended her. British MPs have asked the former head of the child sex abuse inquiry to expl...
    11-11-2016, 12:47 PM
  • Judge Lowell Goddard's epic fail
    by admin
    Dame Lowell Goddard, the New Zealand judge who resigned last week as chair of the 100 million (N$183.5m) Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), did not leave her post voluntarily but was effectively fired. Dame Lowell, appointed by then-Home Secretary Theresa May just over a year ago, had already lost the confidence of senior staff and members of the inquiry panel, according to two well-placed legal sources. The Home Office has denied she was sacked, according to reports. After she ...
    09-08-2016, 11:07 AM
  • Sir Ngatata Love's lawyer claims agreement had no impact on Trust
    by admin
    Sir Ngatata Love's lawyer Colin Carruthers QC says the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) theory against his client is wrong, with a key agreement placing no financial cost on the Wellington Tenths Trust. The former leading Treaty of Waitangi negotiator and academic is on trial in the High Court at Wellington, accused of obtaining funds by deception, or alternatively of obtaining a secret commission.The charges relate to allegations that Love showed favour to Auckland property developer Redwood, and ...
    05-08-2016, 02:44 PM
  • Transport boss pleads guilty to corruption charges
    by admin
    The Serious Fraud Office says the guilty plea yesterday by an Auckland Council manager to corruption charges shows the dangers in not questioning a culture of gratuities. Barrie Kenneth James George, 69, this morning at the High Court at Auckland pleaded guilty to two charges of accepting bribes as a public official when he took gifts worth $103,580 between 2005 and 2012. The gifts included cash, and lavish overseas holidays for George and his family. SFO Director, Julie Read welcomed the guilty plea...
    04-08-2016, 10:40 AM
  • Identities of corrupt JP's stay secret
    by admin
    The identities of Justices of the Peace disciplined for incompetence, making false allegations or misusing their title for personal gain are being kept secret by the Ministry of Justice.In the case of the above JP Denis Selwyn Callesen of Keri Keri, the Crown Law Office even halted a private prosecution against Mr Callessen after evidence emerged that Mr Callessen and his former secretary Robin Morris had perverted the course of justice.

    The Ministry believes the privacy of...
    23-07-2016, 12:35 PM
  • Government funded escape artist Philip Smith found guilty
    by admin
    The murderer who embarrassed New Zealand law and border authorities by flying to Brazil while on temporary release from prison has been convicted for the audacious escape. Charges of escaping lawful custody and making a false statement to renew a passport have been added to Phillip John Smith's lengthy criminal record, along with murder, child sex abuse, kidnapping, tax fraud and arson. In an unusual legal procedure, a jury was chosen at the Auckland District Court today and the judge immedia...
    22-07-2016, 02:05 PM
Working...
X