• Introducing the New Zealand Justice Forum

    The New Zealand Justice Forum aims to pool the collective experiences of our citizens, lawyers, and academics in order to discuss the many defects that weaken the integrity of the legal system.
  • TRANSPARENCY IN NEW ZEALAND


    Transparency International New Zealand posted a news story on Voxy yesterday stating its "emergent overall findings" into its "National Integrity Systems review" "found that high standards of independence, integrity and accountability were generally met, although areas for improvements were noted. New Zealand also scores highly for fiscal transparency."

    The story states a further report will be provided in July, with the full report concluding August 27th. The public are invited to provide feedback through the local autonomous chapter's website, but the site has been down since the story appeared.

    The New Zealand government has less of a problem getting TINZ's ear than the public. The TINZ review's $400,000 budget is being funded by Crown agencies, including the Auditor General. TINZ Review Director Suzanne Snively (pictured) reports biweekly to Solicitor General Michael Heron or Attorney General Chris Finlayson and advises she will be paid $50,000 for her efforts. The story maintains the work is "welcomed by Minister of State Services Jonathan Coleman and Labour spokesperson for State Services Phil Goff".

    Ms Snively, an American whose most notable achievement could be making a personal fortune off NZ government contracts, currently as Principal of More Media Ltd, advised kiwisfirst last month that she considers New Zealand to be virtually corruption free. When confronted with survey results which revealed New Zealanders are twice as likely to pay bribes as Australians, she suggested the result was skewed by Australians' ignorance of how corrupt things are across the ditch. She says she prefers to think positively and claimed much of the dispute with TINZ's findings comes from people focused on the negative - including publisher Vince Siemer.

    Director Snively freely admitted her private company exists on government contracts, but stated this and the Crown's funding of TINZ's review posed no conflict because the review was "objective" and controlled by "22 researchers" independent of the funders. Asked if researchers were paid, Snively responded "some are and some are not". Asked what the methodology was that made the review objective, Ms Snively could only state the review was inclusive of the entire country.

    TINZ has been under a cloud of suspicion for years. Three years ago, Ministry of Transport bureaucrat Claire Johnstone was running the show along with her husband, active police detective Ash Johnstone. On Sinclair Robertson Associates' website - the private consultancy the Johnstones also ran - Mr Johnstone was listed as doing background checks for their private industry clients and the homepage proudly pronounced "We deliver strategic development services for a variety of clients, ranging from iwi groups to central and local government, not-for-profit organizations and small to medium sized enterprise. We have particular expertise in analyzing and presenting an organisation's business case. This has allowed us to raise equity or access grant funding from government for many of our clients."

    According to Snively, the chapter had 52 members at the end of last year and 12 directors. Most members are either public sector bureaucrats or contractors to the NZ government. Membership requests are routinely turned away, although Snively stated she has only turned down two memberships in the last nine months. Media Law Journal blogger Steven Price advised he had to go through an interview to join last year but Ms Snively disputes this, saying it is simply customary for TINZ directors to have coffee with prospective members as a welcome due to most prospects being already known to the members and that Mr Price apparently misconstrued the process.

    Ms Snively does concede the chapter has been run poorly in the past but says she is committed to increasing transparency and membership, declaring it imperative that the chapter increase its funding from memberships and individual donations. She says the non-for-profit's failure to comply with the Incorporated Societies Act and confusion over its Constitution are due to poor administration prior to her becoming involved.

    Within a week of being informed by kiwisfirst last month of TINZ's failure to post its rules on the Incorporated Societies website, a December 2009 amended version of the rules were filed. The Berlin parent organisation expressed concern about the lapse and said it would investigate.
    Comments 2 Comments
    1. 1victim's Avatar
      1victim -
      They're as transparent as our courts, lawyers, government, and police .....

      i.e. - corrupt as duck.

      Another strategically placed government plant to spread suppression and corruption for our increasingly dictatorial and oppressive government.

      The only thing transparent about TINZ is YOU Snively ..... you are full of sh!t.

      1victim
    1. innocence project's Avatar
      innocence project -
      I notice this lovely group's membership application states it "does not undertake investigations of alleged corruption or expose individual cases either alone or in conjunction with other organisations". What use are they? I can see why the government funds them...
  • Copyright

    The New Zealand Copyright Act 1994 specifies certain circumstances where all or a substantial part of a copyright work may be used without the copyright owner's permission. A "fair dealing" with copyright material does not infringe copyright if it is for the following purposes: research or private study; criticism or review; or reporting current events. If you are a legal copyright holder, or a designated agent for such, and you believe a post on this website falls outside the boundaries of "fair dealing," and legitimately infringes on your or your client's copyright, please contact the administrator of this site. NZJF contains both original material and material from external sources. Original material: Copyright NZJF. Material from external sources: Copyright the respective owners / authors.