US Proud Boys no longer terrorists in NZ as designation lapses
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech.
Members of the Proud Boys were involved in the US Capitol riots of 2021. Photo / New York Times
Members of the American far-right group the Proud Boys are no longer considered terrorists in New Zealand, as the group's terrorist designation has expired.
A notice published on the New Zealand Gazette on June 19 confirmed the group's 2022 designation as a terrorist entity under the Terrorism Suppression Act had lapsed.
A spokesperson of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet said the Proud Boys remained 'on the radar' of the Terrorism Designation Working Group.
'[I]n due course, officials will consider any new information that arises to support a decision around whether there are reasonable grounds to designate it in accordance with the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002.'
While the statement didn't address why the designation wasn't renewed, it detailed how such an action required an entity to 'either knowingly carrying out, or knowingly participating in the carrying out, of an act of terrorism'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
US needs to walk the talk
When new neighbours move in just down the street there is always a frisson of interest in what they are going to be like. Will they fit in well with the neighbourhood? How many people will be coming and going? Will they play loud music at all hours? Wellington, and New Zealand, have this week seen the arrival of someone different enough to get the net curtains twitching and set the tongues clacking. No less than the FBI, the United States' venerable law enforcement and criminal investigation agency, is in town. The first question which might spring to mind is, why would the US's domestic intelligence and security service want to have an office in New Zealand? That might quickly be followed by: what specifically are they going to be doing here? Do we need to be worried? The opening of the permanent legal attache FBI office at the US Embassy and the visit of FBI director Kash Patel were surrounded in secrecy, just as one might expect. Until now, New Zealand's links with the FBI through the Five Eyes intelligence partnership went through its office in Canberra. The new office in the capital has been established to investigate all threats to these countries and this geopolitical region, including cybercrime, terrorism, the narcotics trade and gun-running, child exploitation and money laundering. Mr Patel's visit was exposed when a sharp-eyed Newstalk ZB journalist recognised him in the basement of Parliament. There were other clues too for amateur sleuths — a US Department of Justice aircraft at Wellington Airport and a large group of American officials and New Zealand police gathering outside a downtown hotel. The US Embassy resorted to the old refusal to confirm or deny trick when asked. By the time Mr Patel put out a statement on Thursday afternoon explaining he was here to open the new office, he had already met with Police Minister Mark Mitchell, GCSB and NZSIS Minister Judith Collins, Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Police Commissioner Richard Chambers. As University of Otago professor of international relations Robert Patman has pointed out, the move to open an FBI branch in New Zealand has its ironies. It may be good news that the US wants to take a larger role in fighting crime around the Pacific, but he says the Trump administration has shown little willingness itself to adhere to the international rules-based order since coming to power and has actually undermined the rule of law with claims to take over Canada and Greenland. More broadly, Mr Patel's visit and announcement also puts New Zealand and its leaders in a potentially difficult position when it comes to relations with China. While they have been extremely cautious making any comment about China, the FBI director was less tight-lipped, saying it would help to counter China's influence across the Pacific and, in the words of an FBI spokesman, confront threats from "hostile nation-state actors like the Chinese Communist Party". Our government has pushed back at those suggestions. Ms Collins said the office was about countering transnational crime and New Zealand was not going to single out any one country, and it was up to Mr Patel to decide what he wanted to say. Mr Peters said China was not even raised during his meeting with the director. Unsurprisingly, China has bristled, despite Ms Collins saying she did not think it would comment. A Chinese Embassy spokesperson said it opposed "groundless assertions or vilifications" out of a "Cold War mentality" and that it had noted the US assertions and our ministers' remarks to the media. Certainly there are some weird things going on in a world which seems to get stranger by the minute. Granted, an FBI office in New Zealand is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, particularly for those who want the country to pull out of the Five Eyes alliance. But it is certainly a good move if such international crime-busting endeavours are going to make a difference to stopping the awful spread of drugs such as methamphetamine among the most vulnerable people in Pacific nations. We have seen recently how drug smuggling is making many thousands of people's lives there a misery. Far better for us to be on the side of good in the fight against such evils.
1News
2 days ago
- 1News
Zelensky brings Europe's top leaders with him to meet Trump
Ukraine's future could hinge on a hastily assembled meeting at the White House as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky brings with him an extraordinary cadre of European leaders to show US President Donald Trump a united front against Russia. The European political heavy-hitters were left out of Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin last Friday, and they look to safeguard Ukraine and the continent from any widening aggression from Moscow. By arriving as a group, they hope to avoid any debacles like Zelensky's February meeting in the Oval Office, where Trump chastised him for not showing enough gratitude for American military aid. The meeting on Monday (early Tuesday morning, NZ time) also is a test of America's relationship with its closest allies after the European Union and United Kingdom accepted Trump's tariff hikes partly because they wanted his support on Ukraine. Monday's showing is a sign both of the progress and the possible distress coming out of the Alaska meeting as many of Europe's leaders are descending on Washington with the explicit goal of protecting Ukraine's interests, a rare and sweeping show of diplomatic force. ADVERTISEMENT "It's important that America agrees to work with Europe to provide security guarantees for Ukraine, and therefore for all of Europe," Zelensky said on X. The night before the meeting, however, Trump seemed to put the onus on Zelensky to agree to concessions and suggested that Ukraine could not regain Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, setting off an armed conflict that led to its broader 2022 invasion. President Donald Trump welcomes Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House in Washington, Friday, Feb. 28, 2025. (Source: Associated Press) "President Zelensky of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," he wrote Sunday night on social media. "Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!" Zelensky appeared to respond with his own post late Sunday, saying, "We all share a strong desire to end this war quickly and reliably." He went on to say that "peace must be lasting," not as it was after Russia seized Crimea and part of the Donbas in eastern Ukraine eight years ago, and "Putin simply used it as a springboard for a new attack." The sitdown in Alaska yielded the possible contours for stopping the war in Ukraine, though it was unclear whether the terms discussed would ultimately be acceptable to Zelensky or Putin. The European heavyweights going to Washington ADVERTISEMENT Planning to join Zelensky in America's capital are European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. On the table for discussion are possible NATO-like security guarantees that Ukraine would need for any peace with Russia to be durable. Putin opposes Ukraine joining NATO outright, yet Trump's team claims the Russian leader is open to allies agreeing to defend Ukraine if it comes under attack. Trump briefed Zelensky and European allies shortly after the Putin meeting, and details from the discussions emerged in a scattershot way that seemed to rankle the US president, who had chosen not to outline any terms when appearing afterward with Putin. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, is welcomed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz upon arrival in the garden of the chancellery in Berlin, Germany, Wednesday, Aug. 13, 2025 (Source: Associated Press) "BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA," Trump posted Sunday on social media. The president also bemoaned media coverage of his summit with Putin and said on Truth Social: "I had a great meeting in Alaska." Following the Alaska summit, Trump declared that a ceasefire was not necessary for peace talks to proceed, a sudden shift to a position favored by Putin. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that a ceasefire was still possible but that "the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal." ADVERTISEMENT The issues on the table for the European allies European officials confirmed that Trump told them Putin is still seeking control of the entire Donbas region, even though Ukraine controls a meaningful share of it. And Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said the US and its allies could offer Ukraine a NATO-like commitment to defend the country if it came under attack as the possible security guarantee. "How that's constructed, what we call it, how it's built, what guarantees are built into it that are enforceable, that's what we'll be talking about over the next few days with our partners who are coming in from overseas," Rubio told NBC's "Meet the Press." Rubio said on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that such a commitment "would be a very big move" by Trump. He expects the delegations will "spend six, seven hours talking about these things, maybe more, and try to get to a point where we have something more concrete." Monday's meeting will likely be very tough for Zelensky, an official close to the ongoing talks said. That official spoke on condition of anonymity to speak openly about thinking within Ukraine and between allies. Zelensky needs to prevent a scenario in which he gets blamed for blocking peace talks by rejecting Putin's maximalist demand on the Donbas, the official said. It is a demand Zelensky has said many times he will never accept because it is unconstitutional and could create a launching pad for future Russian attacks. ADVERTISEMENT If confronted with pressure to accept Putin's demands, Zelensky would likely have to revert to a skill he has demonstrated time and again: diplomatic tact. Ukrainian leadership is seeking a trilateral meeting with Zelensky, Trump and Putin to discuss sensitive matters, including territorial issues. Zelensky is looking to avoid another Oval Office blowup After enduring a public tirade by Trump and Vice President JD Vance in February, Zelensky worked to repair relations with the US. Constant diplomatic communication and a 15-minute meeting at the Vatican in April on the sidelines of Pope Francis' funeral helped turn the tide. Trump appeared at the time to be swayed by Zelensky's conditions for peace. But Trump says he cares primarily about ending the war, an ambition that led him after his meeting with Putin to discard the need for a ceasefire. European allies also have worked with Trump, reaching a deal in July for NATO allies to buy weapons from the US for Ukraine. Ahead of Monday's meeting, France's Macron stressed the importance of building up Ukraine's military and the need to show Putin that Europe interprets his moves as a threat to other nations. ADVERTISEMENT "If we are weak with Russia today, we'll be preparing the conflicts of tomorrow and they will impact the Ukrainians and — make no mistake — they can impact us, too," Macron said.
RNZ News
2 days ago
- RNZ News
Hawaiian conservationists win legal battle to protect marine sanctuary
Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument is an area spanning more than 1.2 million square kilometers of ocean. Photo: USFWS A court in Hawai'i has tossed a federal directive allowing commercial fishing in protected Pacific waters, in defiance of orders from the White House. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a notice on April 2025 authorising commercial fishing within the , an area spanning more than 1.2 million square kilometers of ocean. This notice was pursuant to an executive order from US President Donald Trump, titled "Unleashing American Commercial Fishing in the Pacific", that dismantled fishing protections in certain parts of the monument. Since the NMFS letter was issued, commercial fishing operations quickly began in waters between 50 and 200 nautical miles around Johnston Atoll, Jarvis Island, and Wake Island. The action was met with a lawsuit backed by campaign group Earthjustice, on behalf of a group of Hawaiian conservation groups. More than four months later, the US District Court in Hawai'i gave them their first victory , voiding the letter and thus the legal right for commercial fishers. The court asserted that the government had not gone through the correct legal processes, and that the public had not been consulted. Among the groups making up the plaintiffs for the case was the Kapa'a community, a group of Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners from the island of Kaua'i. One of their founding members, Solomon Pili Kaho'ohalahala, has been a prominent environmental activist for decades. His community call him "Uncle Sol". He told RNZ Pacific that this was personal. "When [President Trump] made that announcement, he made no provisions for the care and protection of resources for the generations of children that are going to be the ones to inherit this place." "For me personally, that is an insult to our marine cultural protection as indigenous people, that look at the care for generations, to ensure that our children's children's children will have a place to help to take care of them in their time." Seeing this, he approached Earthjustice's David Henkin, a Honolulu-based lawyer who became the lead attorney. Henkin believes that President Trump's use of the Antiquities Act, which is the statute that President Barack Obama originally used to establish the monument, would open the door to the White House crashing any protected marine area they wanted. "If President Trump were to get away with it and undo protections within a monument, this very important tool for protecting important lands and marine waters for future generations would be taken away. "They cannot lawfully destroy the monument and the ecosystems inside of it." Henkin said that when the NMFS directive was issued, fishing vessels flooded in within hours, according to their tracking efforts. "On April the 27th, two days after the letter came out, the first Hawaii-based long line commercial fishing operations started happening in the monument." According to , as of 12 August, fishing vessels have all but vacated the monument expansion area. Kahoʻohalahala said that indigenous rights were falling victim to Trump's rhetorical belief that the United States needs to dominate in all things. "Evidently the colonizer, the United no support for our generational view and protection of resources, and in fact has now tried to say we want to extract everything we can, because we want to be the biggest and the best." "That is unacceptable to me as a native Hawaiian." Earthjustice filed their lawsuit in May, which centred challenging President Trump's authority to dismantle protections under the Antiquities Act. The order effectively usurped the need for such a move to go through Congress, Henkin said. In June, Henkin motioned for summary judgment, or a ruling without trial, to section out and specifically address the NMFS letter. They argued that NMFS had not followed the rules set out in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, requiring public notice and consultation before any changes to fishing regulations. The court granted the motion. In ruling, Judge Micah W.J. Smith said that fishing operations could not lean on that letter as legal protection to fish in the monument. "The letter did not merely suggest that NMFS would decline to enforce its existing regulations banning commercial fishing there. Instead, the letter took the position that those regulations no longer exist." Judge Smith noted that the NMFS relied on Trump's order in place of existing regulations, which was unlawful in its premise. Further, the plaintiffs argued that their cultural rights and interests in the monument, which is steeped in heritage and ecological importance for the Hawaiian people, were harmed. Judge Smith acknowledge that a "procedural injury" had been caused by the NMFS letter and the executive order, as the plaintiffs had cultural, spiritual, and scientific interests in the monument expansion area. Henkin said there is still work to be done. "I'd say it set a very strong and important precedent for the NMFS that they can't cut corners in that way." "The next steps will be to meet with the court - there's a scheduling conference on 6 October, when we'll be talking about what the schedule will be for resolving those Antiquities Act claims and any other claims that may present themselves."
