Jevon McSkimming – Privacy And Democracy Vs Journalists
Opinion – Asia Pacific AML
'I dont think journalists have yet learnt that their power of the pen or words they publish can perpetually harm a persons livelihood, their familys livelihood and in the case of Mr McSkimming, forever destroy his reputation and career,' says …
Opinion: Kerry Grass, Asia Pacific AML
Is Former NZ Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming a victim of a malicious and orchestrated rumour? Was the rumour designed to derail his candidacy from New Zealand's next Police Commissioner and secure the role to Richard Chambers?
Since the time the news broke that NZ's next Police Commissioner was shortlisted to two candidates, I have been following that media trail. It was therefore an interesting article to read, shortly after, that one of the candidates had been stood down from employment duties. The media article reported that there was a pending investigation and gave some detail about the allegation.
What was then unfortunate to read but fairly common in New Zealand's media, was a small number of journalists who continued reporting details of the allegation. Such conduct by journalists I find very frustrating and it would seem they have ignored that Mr McSkimming has minimum rights afforded to him under New Zealand's laws. These laws include the Bill of Rights Act, the Privacy Act and the Employment Relations Act.
Section 27 of the Bill of Rights Act (BORA), afford Mr McSkimming to the Right to Natural Justice. It sets out –
(1) Every person has the right to the observance of the principles of natural justice by any tribunal or other public authority which has the power to make a determination in respect of that person's rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law.
(2) Every person whose rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law have been affected by a determination of any tribunal or other public authority has the right to apply, in accordance with law, for judicial review of that determination.
(3) Every person has the right to bring civil proceedings against, and to defend civil proceedings brought by, the Crown, and to have those proceedings heard, according to law, in the same way as civil proceedings between individuals.
To then read that journalists and the Minister of Police continued to publicly share their personal views and report details of the allegation – is beyond belief.
I don't think journalists have yet learnt that their power of the pen or words they publish can perpetually harm a person's livelihood, their family's livelihood and in the case of Mr McSkimming, forever destroy his reputation and career. This impact still eventuates if he is found innocent of the allegations that journalists and Minister Mitchell are reporting.
There is also the possibility the allegations were designed to derail Mr McSkimming's role as the next Police Commissioner. If so, the orchestration and malicious leaking were successful in the objective.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
What is the future for the Waitangi Tribunal?
Now that the Treaty Principles Bill has been consigned to the bin some who want to keep up the conversation about sovereignty and rangatiratanga (Māori self-determination), are refocusing on the Waitangi Tribunal. On the one hand are those who believe the tribunal should be remade to have the power to make decisions which are binding on the government. This would make the tribunal the highest power in New Zealand, above Parliament. (Incidentally, King Charles may well have concerns if Parliament attempts to cede its authority). On the other hand there are those who say the tribunal has done its job and should be dismantled. One of the earliest documents in our history was the Treaty. This document was intended to provide for a peaceful society by, among other things, describing Queen Victoria as in charge, reserving to each tribe their lands, other possessions and their rangatiratanga. This was interpreted for many years as leaving each Māori tribe authority over their own affairs and assets and that Queen Victoria was generally in charge over all. The Waitangi Tribunal came into being in 1975. Its purpose was to make recommendations on claims relating to the application of the principles of the Treaty. For that purpose it is to determine what the Treaty means and whether certain matters are inconsistent with these principles. It costs around $21 million per annum to run. For most of us this tribunal was set up to right the wrongs perpetrated on Māori by the Crown confiscating lands and other possessions. For many years it has had widespread support from New Zealanders. The law establishing the tribunal specifically denies jurisdiction in regard to any Bill that has been introduced to Parliament, unless Parliament has resolved to refer it to the tribunal. As historical land claims are coming to an end, the publicised work of the tribunal has been taken up with making comment about a wide variety of issues, with a focus on the choices government might make. For example the tribunal has spent some years looking into health. The tribunal made a finding that "the health system has not addressed Māori health inequities in a Treaty-compliant way, and this is in part why Māori health inequities have persisted". When the government disestablished the recently established Māori Health Authority the tribunal found that the Crown prejudiced Māori by not engaging with them over the scrapping of the authority. The Waitangi Tribunal has also been conducting a long-standing inquiry into a variety of claims relating to freshwater. Giving evidence to this inquiry The New Zealand Māori Council in 2018 pushed for a water commission to be appointed (rather than elected) made up of 50% Māori to control all water in New Zealand. A lawyer representing over a dozen hapu and iwi said the way the Crown had managed freshwater and left Māori out of the process was similar to theft. This year the tribunal has found that the Treaty Principles Bill breached Treaty principles by failing to guarantee rangatiratanga. When it looked into the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill it found that, if it were enacted, this Bill would be of constitutional significance, as it seeks to influence the way Parliament makes law and therefore it is inherently relevant to Māori. A potted version of the history could be described as thus. In 1840 the Treaty of Waitangi was signed between the Crown and various Māori tribes in New Zealand. This gave Queen Victoria overall control of New Zealand. Each tribe was guaranteed to keep ownership of their own land and possessions and to have internal control of their own affairs. Every citizen in New Zealand had the protection of the Crown. In 1975 the Waitangi Tribunal was set up to deal with legitimate grievances over confiscation of land and other possessions. It was expanded in 1985 in relation to historical claims. The tribunal has now interpreted its role as making pronouncements over any proposed legislation. It seems to have decided that all legislation can and would affect Māori, and if Māori could become part of a group who become or remain disadvantaged the law proposed is a breach of Treaty obligations. In our society, which now has many more than just British and Māori subjects, how can we best move forward? Will we continue with the tribunal with a focus on Māori to the exclusion of other priorities for government support hoping this will remain viable? Will we elevate the Waitangi Tribunal to make it the supreme decision-maker in New Zealand over all things which could possibly touch on the lives of Māori? Or might it be better to decide once the tribunal finishes its historic claims it is time to close it down, possibly replacing its role of critiquing government policies as they may affect Māori with a cheaper option? The challenge we have is to try to weave the Treaty and whatever arrangements we have around it with the primary duty of a stable democratic country to look after its most vulnerable without fear or favour. One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, One ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. Like Tolkien said. hcalvert@ • Hilary Calvert is a former Otago regional councillor, MP and Dunedin city councillor.
RNZ News
12 hours ago
- RNZ News
Passengers injured after bus carrying 17 people crashes
The bus crashed on Mossburn Five Rivers Road on State Highway 97 about 3.45pm today. Photo: Google Maps A bus crash in rural Southland has left some passengers injured. A police spokesperson said the bus was carrying 17 passengers, including the driver, when it crashed on Mossburn Five Rivers Road on State Highway 97 about 3.45pm on Wednesday. Some passengers received minor to moderate injures, they said. The highway was closed near Diack Road while the bus was moved. "Motorists are advised to take alternate routes, such as the Resolution Drive on-ramp, and expect delays," police said. Hato Hone St John has been approached for comment.
NZ Herald
12 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Gisborne-based fishing company fined $13,000 for prohibited fishing; boat and catch seized
A Gisborne-based fishing company and its skipper were fined $13,000 after fishing in a seasonally prohibited area. The Crown also seized the company's $250,000 fishing vessel and more than $16,000 worth of fish.
