Latest news with #BillofRightsAct
Scoop
2 days ago
- General
- Scoop
Rights Aotearoa Demands Urgent Re-evaluation Of Regulatory Standards Bill's Human Rights Impact
Press Release – Rights Aotearoa Leading Human Rights NGO Calls Ministry of Justice Assessment 'Dangerously Superficial' and 'Constitutionally Incoherent' WELLINGTON, 4 June 2025 – Rights Aotearoa, New Zealand's leading NGO devoted to promoting and defending universal human rights, today called on Attorney-General Judith Collins KC to urgently instruct the Ministry of Justice to comprehensively re-evaluate its advice on the Regulatory Standards Bill's consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Ministry's advice concluded that the Bill 'appears to be consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the Bill of Rights Act.' Rights Aotearoa has delivered a detailed letter to the Attorney-General demonstrating that this conclusion represents a grave failure of constitutional analysis that ignores the Bill's fundamental threat to human rights, democracy, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi. 'The Ministry of Justice has failed in its constitutional duty to assess this Bill's impact on human rights properly,' said Paul Thistoll, CEO of Rights Aotearoa. 'Their analysis acknowledges that the Bill departs from how rights and freedoms are expressed in the Bill of Rights Act, yet inexplicably concludes it has no impact on those rights. This is constitutionally incoherent.' Rights Aotearoa's analysis identifies multiple critical failures in the Ministry's assessment. The Ministry examined only one right superficially—freedom of expression—while ignoring clear conflicts with electoral rights, freedom from discrimination, minority rights, and the right to life. The advice fails entirely to consider how the Bill's mechanisms will create 'regulatory chill,' deterring future governments from enacting essential protections. Of particular concern is the Ministry's failure to analyse the Bill's complete exclusion of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, despite the Waitangi Tribunal's findings that the Crown breached Treaty principles through inadequate consultation with Māori and its recommendation for an 'immediate halt' to the Bill's progress. The organisation highlighted how the Bill's emphasis on property rights and narrow economic efficiency will systematically undermine anti-discrimination protections. Essential measures like disability accommodations, pay equity legislation, and protections against discrimination could be challenged as 'impairing' property rights. 'This Bill creates a competing quasi-constitutional framework that elevates property rights above all other human rights,' the letter states. 'It attempts to lock in a narrow ideological worldview that will bind future Parliaments.' Rights Aotearoa has committed to filing an action in the High Court, should the Bill pass in its current form, seeking a declaration that it is inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act. The organisation calls on the Attorney-General to instruct the Ministry of Justice to conduct a comprehensive re-evaluation that accurately analyses the Bill's downstream effects on all rights, considers its practical operation, examines the constitutional implications of creating a parallel rights framework, evaluates the exclusion of Te Tiriti, and assesses the impacts on anti-discrimination protections. 'At this critical constitutional moment, New Zealanders deserve rigorous, honest analysis of how this Bill will affect their fundamental rights,' said Thistoll. 'The current advice is not merely inadequate—it's dangerously misleading.' About Rights Aotearoa Rights Aotearoa is Aotearoa New Zealand's leading non-governmental organisation dedicated to promoting and defending universal human rights. Although we have a focus on transgender, non-binary and intersex rights, we work to ensure that all people in New Zealand enjoy the full range of human rights and fundamental freedoms recognised in domestic and international law.
Scoop
2 days ago
- General
- Scoop
Rights Aotearoa Demands Urgent Re-evaluation Of Regulatory Standards Bill's Human Rights Impact
WELLINGTON, 4 June 2025 – Rights Aotearoa, New Zealand's leading NGO devoted to promoting and defending universal human rights, today called on Attorney-General Judith Collins KC to urgently instruct the Ministry of Justice to comprehensively re-evaluate its advice on the Regulatory Standards Bill's consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Ministry's advice concluded that the Bill "appears to be consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the Bill of Rights Act." Rights Aotearoa has delivered a detailed letter to the Attorney-General demonstrating that this conclusion represents a grave failure of constitutional analysis that ignores the Bill's fundamental threat to human rights, democracy, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi. "The Ministry of Justice has failed in its constitutional duty to assess this Bill's impact on human rights properly," said Paul Thistoll, CEO of Rights Aotearoa. "Their analysis acknowledges that the Bill departs from how rights and freedoms are expressed in the Bill of Rights Act, yet inexplicably concludes it has no impact on those rights. This is constitutionally incoherent." Rights Aotearoa's analysis identifies multiple critical failures in the Ministry's assessment. The Ministry examined only one right superficially—freedom of expression—while ignoring clear conflicts with electoral rights, freedom from discrimination, minority rights, and the right to life. The advice fails entirely to consider how the Bill's mechanisms will create "regulatory chill," deterring future governments from enacting essential protections. Advertisement - scroll to continue reading Of particular concern is the Ministry's failure to analyse the Bill's complete exclusion of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, despite the Waitangi Tribunal's findings that the Crown breached Treaty principles through inadequate consultation with Māori and its recommendation for an "immediate halt" to the Bill's progress. The organisation highlighted how the Bill's emphasis on property rights and narrow economic efficiency will systematically undermine anti-discrimination protections. Essential measures like disability accommodations, pay equity legislation, and protections against discrimination could be challenged as "impairing" property rights. "This Bill creates a competing quasi-constitutional framework that elevates property rights above all other human rights," the letter states. "It attempts to lock in a narrow ideological worldview that will bind future Parliaments." Rights Aotearoa has committed to filing an action in the High Court, should the Bill pass in its current form, seeking a declaration that it is inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act. The organisation calls on the Attorney-General to instruct the Ministry of Justice to conduct a comprehensive re-evaluation that accurately analyses the Bill's downstream effects on all rights, considers its practical operation, examines the constitutional implications of creating a parallel rights framework, evaluates the exclusion of Te Tiriti, and assesses the impacts on anti-discrimination protections. "At this critical constitutional moment, New Zealanders deserve rigorous, honest analysis of how this Bill will affect their fundamental rights," said Thistoll. "The current advice is not merely inadequate—it's dangerously misleading." About Rights Aotearoa Rights Aotearoa is Aotearoa New Zealand's leading non-governmental organisation dedicated to promoting and defending universal human rights. Although we have a focus on transgender, non-binary and intersex rights, we work to ensure that all people in New Zealand enjoy the full range of human rights and fundamental freedoms recognised in domestic and international law.
Scoop
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
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.
Scoop
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
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.
Scoop
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Jevon McSkimming – Privacy And Democracy Vs Journalists
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.
