Latest news with #TortureConvention
1News
05-05-2025
- 1News
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision. Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money, but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings, so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told Morning Report no amount of money could make up for what survivors endured. "Their stories of abuse were harrowing and heartbreaking. Obviously the UN made a determination on Lake Alice quite rightly around torture, we've worked hard to make sure we've put in place a redress system to make sure people are compensated for that. "Whatever we do, no amount of money frankly makes up for what survivors have endured." The government's focus was on making sure it acknowledged and formally apologised, supported survivors with a better redress system and prevent abuse through improving the operating practices of key government agencies, Luxon said. Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. "[The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence," Richards said. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth — normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice — and a phone plan — he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just as important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care.
Otago Daily Times
04-05-2025
- Otago Daily Times
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
By Anneke Smith of RNZ A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision. Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. 'It's the perpetrator deciding what their punishment will be' Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." 'What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this' Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. "[The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth - normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice - and a phone plan - he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just an important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care.
RNZ News
04-05-2025
- RNZ News
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
Lake Alice survivor Malcolm Richards (pictured in his shed) is legally challenging Cabinet's decision on redress for those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility. Photo: RNZ / Anneke Smith A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision . Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. Chris Griggs Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." Malcolm Richards says his shed is his rehab and he heads there to create timber trinkets when "things become too much". Photo: RNZ / Anneke Smith Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. [The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth - normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice - and a phone plan - he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just an important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Newsroom
04-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsroom
Lake Alice survivor takes Govt to court over redress scheme
New Zealand's international human rights record could take another blow as Malcolm Richards seeks an urgent judicial review of the Government's $20 million Lake Alice redress scheme, saying it fails in its obligation to provide adequate and appropriate redress in line with the international Convention on Torture. Meanwhile, representatives from the UN, including the torture committee's special rapporteur and the office of the High Commissioner for Refugees are on the Government's case to implement the international body's recommendations on torture redress. At the same time, the Government is actively considering whether to hold onto the get out of jail free card that it collected when signing up to the Torture Convention, or give up that card and agree to unreservedly comply with the international law New Zealand signed up to. In December, Erica Stanford – the minister responsible for the Government's response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care – announced a redress scheme for those who were tortured at the Lake Alice adolescent unit. Given the Crown's formal acknowledgment of torture, as well as the age and physical wellbeing of the remaining survivors, the Governmnet always said this group – thought to be about 200 survivors – would be the first cab off the rank for redress following the final report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care. The Government set aside about $22.68m for individual payments, which would come alongside a new written apology acknowledging they were tortured, and access to support and rehabilitative services. Of this, about $3m was allocated to remuneration of an independent arbiter, independent legal advice for survivors and operating costs, leaving a little under $20m for compensation payments. Survivors who could provide records of their admission to the Lake Alice adolescent unit, as well as proof of being subjected to unmodified electric shock therapy or paraldehyde injections, would be eligible to either apply for an expedited predetermined payment or to go through an individualised pathway and receive a bespoke compensation payment. A total of 118 people have come forward to apply for redress so far. Of those, 74 have chosen the fast-track $150,000 payment and 46 of those have been paid out to a total of $6.9m. Meanwhile, 44 have chosen the individualised pathway, which is now closed to applicants (unless there are extenuating circumstances that allow a selected minister to add them to the list). Five survivor applicants are awaiting confirmation of eligibility. And so far, 11 people have signed up for the financial and wellbeing support on offer. Last year, Stanford acknowledged 'it is not possible to right or compensate for the wrongs of the past'. 'We recognise that there is no number, there is no precedent for this. And we knew that whatever we came up with wasn't going to meet some people's expectations, others it would.' But this roughly $150,000 per person was where Cabinet had landed (despite also considering a payment of $75,000 or $100,000 per person). However, Richards and his lawyer Chris Griggs said it wasn't just that this scheme was imperfect, it actually breached Article 14 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, they argued. 'Having admitted and been found internationally responsible for torturing children at Lake Alice, the Government now thinks it can minimise its liability by setting up a compensation process which it controls and which does not comply with international minimum standards,' Griggs said. So, Richards was seeking a declaration from the High Court that that the scheme was unlawful. 'We are very keen on being perceived internationally as the great defenders and upholders of an international human rights law. We are not shy at all about criticising other countries or human rights violations. So we better get our own act in order, would be my suggestion,' Griggs said. Article 14 of the international treaty required the government to 'ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation'. In 2012, the UN Committee said this meant the Government needed to 'enact legislation specifically providing a victim of torture and ill-treatment with an effective remedy and the right to obtain adequate and appropriate redress, including compensation and as full rehabilitation as possible. Such legislation must allow for individuals to exercise this right and ensure their access to a judicial remedy'. The current redress scheme was not underpinned by any legislation, instead it was an administrative rather than judicial programme. The lack of legislation, as well as the fact the payments were made ex gratia (gifts), and that the payments came with an obligation to sign a contract of final settlement all meant that the survivors had no way to challenge the scheme or their compensation payments in court. It also meant they could not bring a future civil case against the Crown for compensation for torture, Griggs said, adding that this need for a redress scheme to be legally enforceable and therefore able to be challenged was a key requirement of the Torture Convention. A finite pool of money Richards and his lawyer also said the Government had essentially predetermined the amount survivors would get by allocating a specific funding pool. This allowed for little variation in the compensation payments, despite the vastly different survivor experiences. In response to a question from Newsroom in December, Stanford said while Cabinet had set aside $22.68m for the scheme, the total amount available to the arbiter to assign to each torture survivor would not be capped. Last week, Stanford's office confirmed to Newsroom it expected arbiter Paul Davidson KC to work within the allocated funding envelope – which would be finalised by Cabinet in the coming weeks – 'but he is able to return to ministers if he wanted to make a case for more funding'. Richards and Griggs said Davidson had made it clear to survivors that he planned to work within the allocated funding envelope, as his terms of reference allowed. That would mean if the money was split evenly between the 120 applicants, they would get roughly $160,000 each – there was not the money available for significantly higher payments for those whose experiences of torture were more extreme. Griggs told Newsroom this was a difficult and sensitive issue to discuss, but the reality was that some torture survivors might have been at Lake Alice for days or weeks and been subjected to one instance of torture, while others might have been there for months or years and subjected to repeated torture, leaving them with significant trauma. In a February Cabinet paper, Stanford noted the scheme was unprecedented and was therefore hard to know how much to compensate survivors. She referred to a 2019 example from the UK, where 33 Greek Cypriots alleged torture and human rights abuses from the mid-1950s. The individuals received approximately £30,000 (NZ$65,000) but the British government did not acknowledge that torture occurred and said the settlement was not an admission of liability. In Australia, a former ward of the state of Victoria was forced to undergo electric shock therapy (ECT) after disclosing he had been sexually abused in care. He reached an $825,000 settlement with the state government and Uniting Church in 2020. And in 1996, Nepal passed the Compensation Relating to Torture Act which provides for victims to claim up to approximately NZ$142,500 (adjusted equivalent) and the Nepalese courts have awarded compensation for torture in a number of cases. However, victims have only 35 days from the date of the alleged torture to lodge a claim. Richards told Newsroom it was impossible to pluck a number out of thin air, but what was being put forward by the Government did not meet the definition of fair and adequate. As a teenager, Richards was admitted to Lake Alice and was beaten and raped. He was also subjected to unmodified ECT, including on his legs and genitals. The survivor said he witnessed another child die from ECT, and he lived in fear of being sent back to Lake Alice for decades afterwards. Richards continued to suffer physically and cognitively from his months in Lake Alice in 1975. He said the best estimate he could find for how much survivors should be compensated came from Leoni McInroe's high-profile court case in the 1990s, where she made a claim against Selwyn Leeks and the Attorney-General for $1.5m in compensation to account for her unlawful admission, drugging, ECT, seclusion, and a loss of educational and career opportunities. The figure was based off an expert's advice. Leoni McInroe, Lake Alice survivor. Photo: Aaron Smale Griggs said he believed fiscal considerations were driving the design of the scheme, but they shouldn't. 'If you drive your car recklessly and smash into someone else's car, and the car happens to be a Mercedes, it's going to cost a whole bunch of money. If you're not insured, you can't just say: 'Oh, sorry, I can only afford to pay part of it. I'll pay for the mud guard'. You actually have to pay what you owe them because of the damage that you caused them. And the government should be no different in that respect.' Richards and Griggs also raised issues with the fact the scheme was limited to those who'd received ECT and paraldehyde injections, failing to recognise those who were beaten, raped, and put in solitary confinement (sometimes naked) while they were children as forms of torture. Survivor 'not surprised' Richards said he wasn't surprised the redress scheme was not what survivors like himself had hoped for. He had been fighting for justice and fair compensation for years and felt he had been repeatedly brushed off, even after the UN finding of torture. While there were different options for more tribunals or support systems to be set up, Richards' experience was that they always fell short. 'The perpetrators are setting their own sentence.' Instead, he called on the Government to pay survivors fair and adequate compensation that would allow them to have autonomy over their own lives and the medical and wellbeing support they needed to access. Attorney-General's discretion That paper from February showed the Government was aware of its obligations under the Torture Convention, and included a three-page summary of guidance from the UN Committee Against Torture on implementing Article 14 of the Torture Convention. Stanford noted the Government's obligations under Article 14, as well as the recommendations from the UN in the cases of Richards and an earlier claim from Lake Alice survivor Paul Zentveld. 'This matter will continue to be raised if it is not satisfactorily addressed,' she said in reference to the periodic reviews the Government was subject to. However, the paper also noted that the UN guidance on Article 14 was not binding and that when New Zealand signed up to the Torture Convention in 1989 it made a reservation, which gave it the right to award compensation to torture victims referred to in article 14 of the Convention Against Torture only at the discretion of the Attorney-General. Essentially, discretion as to whether, and how, the Government awarded compensation to torture victims lay in the hands of Attorney-General Judith Collins. The UN has recommended the Government do away with this reservation, meaning it would be obligated to fully (or unreservedly) comply with Article 14. According to a Cabinet paper from January, the Government was actively considering this, and the Ministry of Justice is expected to provide Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith with advice on this issue by mid-year. He was yet to receive that update from the ministry. Calls for new legislation Griggs said in the spirit of trying to offer solutions he was attempting to draft a bill that could be used to enact torture redress legislation, as required by the Torture Convention. Griggs noted that if Nepal could do it, then New Zealand could too. In the process of attempting to design redress legislation, the lawyer came across a useful template for a tribunal that determined compensation for individuals: the Weathertight Homes Tribunal. 'If we can do a tribunal to sort out people's houses and leak, why can't we do a tribunal to help people who've been tortured by the state? That just seems a bit odd to me.' The application for judicial review will be filed in the High Court at Wellington on Monday morning.
