Auchinvole Chris: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Auchinvole Chris: Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 27 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:9001. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National) 
: 
 I move  
That the Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill be now read a third time 
. This bill promotes a fair efficient and modern justice system and I am grateful for the support it has received from this House and during the select committee process. The Justice and Electoral Committee has made minor technical changes from the original bill as it was introduced but it has fundamentally retained the status quo and its changes still protect current rights of appeal ensuring that this bill retains and will achieve its purpose: the protection of the “great writ”. The “great writ” will be protected from improper use and this ensures that we have an effective justice system. Habeas corpus is an ancient writ requiring a person in State detention to be brought before a judge or court to determine whether their detention is lawful. Its importance throughout history is almost unparalleled with its first recorded use occurring in the 14th century. It is for exactly this reason that the improper use of the writ must be not be allowed to continue. 
In 1997 the Law Commission made recommendations to simplify the procedure for dealing with habeas corpus applications. The Habeas Corpus Act in 2001 implemented the changes recommended in this report and for the first time formalised habeas corpus in legislation. However since then practical experience has revealed several anomalies in the application of the legislation. For example the 2001 Act required habeas corpus applications to be given precedence over all other court business. This left it open to misuse in some cases. In 2007 following consultation with the judiciary and the Government agencies the Law Commission issued a report addressing these concerns. The bill incorporates the changes recommended in that report. 
This bill will allow the High Court or a judge of the High Court to be able to dispense with the rule that habeas corpus applications take precedence over all other business. It will ensure the easier transfer of applications to the Family Court where appropriate. It will provide for a judge to be able to dismiss applications that are statute barred or use incorrect procedure and will allow procedural improvements such as holding pre-hearing conferences and hearings by technology authorised by rules of the court. These changes address issues that have clogged courts failed to evolve with technological improvements and dragged down the position of the “great writ”. This bill will address these issues. I am proud that this bill fits within this Government’s programmes to streamline our courts and ensure they are used for their proper purpose and I would like to congratulate the Hon Chester Borrows on the work he has done in our court system. It has been exemplary and it was a great privilege to be with him down in Westland at Whataroa courthouse. 
I would like to close with this statement. Freedom from arbitrary arrest is a fundamental right. It is vital to our health as a nation that this is protected. This bill does not do anything to diminish the substance of this right. What it does do is ensure that this right is not conflated into a “get out of jail free” card for any situation. It is not. I thank the House for its time and call on all members to support this bill and to support a fair efficient and modern justice system. Thank you. 
Andrew Little 
: Mr Speaker.