Police Association— Statements (Question Time 6 Aug 2013) TE URUROA FLAVELL (Co-Leader—Māori Party) : My question is to the Minister of Police. Is the Government taking any action in response to the unprecedented recommendation from the Police Association— Mr SPEAKER : Order! I am sorry to interrupt the member. This question was transferred, so it is not to the Minister of Police. It is to the Minister of Justice. Would the member like to start his question again. It is to the Minister of Justice. 5. TE URUROA FLAVELL (Co-Leader—Māori Party) to the Minister of Justice: Is the Government taking any action in response to the unprecedented recommendation from the Police Association to call for an independent inquiry into the conviction of Teina Pora; and does she agree with what President Greg O’Connor describes as significant disquiet among police who are uncomfortable with the fact that Teina Pora is in prison for this crime? Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice) : There are two legal avenues for Mr Pora. In 2011 he lodged an application with the Governor-General for the royal prerogative of mercy or a pardon. This application has been on hold as Mr Pora’s lawyer wished to provide additional evidence to be considered. So that is still open. The second avenue is for Mr Pora to appeal to the Privy Council. The Privy Council may either quash Mr Pora’s convictions or order a retrial, which could result in Mr Pora being found not guilty. Mr Pora’s lawyer has advised that he intends to apply to the Privy Council and he is currently finalising papers for this. It is for the courts to decide whether a person is guilty of any crime—not the Government. It would not be constitutionally appropriate for the Government to launch yet another Government inquiry into the police investigation or any other aspects of Mr Pora’s convictions until Mr Pora has completed his legal options. If Mr Pora has new and compelling evidence, then that needs to be presented by his lawyer in the proper way to the proper authorities—that is, to the courts or the Governor-General. The third avenue of inquiry that could be initiated by the Police Association or any other affected person, including Mr Pora, is to lodge a complaint with the Independent Police Conduct Authority, which exists for the purpose of independently inquiring into any allegations of police misconduct. Te Ururoa Flavell : I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate the explanation given by the Minister—it was pretty full—but I did ask a question around whose responsibility this is. She did explain that it fell within the avenues available to Mr Pora and, of course, to his supporters, but the question starts “Is the Government taking any action …”. I am just seeking clarification as to whether the Government under the Minister’s realm has any plans, has any action, can take any action, over this case. I am just seeking some clarification around that. Mr SPEAKER : The Minister might like to elaborate, but it was pretty clear to me in the answer that the Minister was saying it is not the role of the Government at this stage because there are two other courses of action available. Hon JUDITH COLLINS : I can add, I think. I am happy to add for the member’s benefit that there already is an inquiry, and that is the inquiry under the royal prerogative of mercy, which is for a pardon. That inquiry has not progressed further since 2011 because Mr Pora’s lawyer has said that he wants to present more evidence to it. Until he does, then it really cannot progress further. So there already is an inquiry. Te Ururoa Flavell : Thanks to the Minister. What impact does she think the accumulated impact of the police conduct, the police investigation, and their very public call for an inquiry into the conviction of Teina Pora has on the general confidence and trust of New Zealanders in the justice system? Hon JUDITH COLLINS : Well, I think it is a very good point that the member has raised. The fact is, though, that at the moment the ministry is administering 12 applications for pardons and three applications for compensation claims. So at any time—and this is a pretty normal time in these matters—we have 15 claims either for a pardon or for compensation. This is quite a publicly heard matter, but it is absolutely right in a democracy that people should be able to state what they think. If they want to and if they have concerns about any police conduct in Mr Pora’s case, then I will repeat what I have said before today—that they should make a complaint to the Independent Police Conduct Authority, which is the body that has statutory authority and power to investigate. I would suggest that if anyone has any genuine concerns, that is exactly what they should do. Andrew Little : Given that neither an appeal to the Privy Council nor an application for the royal prerogative of mercy can deal with the serious allegations now being made about the police investigation and the handling of the case by the prosecuting counsel and that the Independent Police Conduct Authority cannot deal with both, does she not see that an inquiry into this matter is now urgently required? Hon JUDITH COLLINS : I believe that the member is getting ahead of himself. This matter still has an appeal right to the Privy Council and it also has an open application for a pardon. So the normal course of events would be that a complaint is made to the Independent Police Conduct Authority, which would normally deal with these matters post any court proceedings, which I think is the correct order. But also, if the member has any concerns as to the prosecution behaviour in terms of Crown Law, then I would have thought that a letter of complaint on those lines to the Attorney-General would be the correct course of action.
Posted on: Tue, 06 Aug 2013 23:45:34 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015