Alexander Marc: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Alexander Marc: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:15106] 
9.  
MARC ALEXANDER (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does he agree that imprisonment and further disciplinary action that occurs within prison is a justified limitation on human rights? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Yes. Imprisonment by its very nature is a limitation on the rights ordinarily enjoyed by citizens. It is justifiable both as a protection for the safety of society and a punishment for serious offences committed by offenders against others. The nature of imprisonment and disciplinary action must however be lawful and meet the standards set out in the legislation passed by this House. 
Marc Alexander 
: Why does the law allow a prison inmate like Christopher Taunoa to be compensated by a $240000 payout because his human rights were supposedly temporarily breached in prison when he permanently severed the human rights of his victim with an ear-to-ear foot-long cut to his victim’s throat—so deep it went through to his spinal cord? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: As the judge has not ruled on claims for compensation it is premature and in any case inappropriate to speculate on his likely decision. However I can quote from the  
Dominion Post  
this morning which reported the judge himself as suggesting that: “… an earlier court declaration that the prisoners’ rights under the Bill of Rights Act had been breached was enough in itself.” 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: In the case taken to the High Court against the detention of inmates on the behaviour modification regime did the judge find that the regime involved a serious breach of human rights involving torture and severe mental suffering as had been alleged? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: That certainly had been alleged by the inmates themselves and their counsel but Justice Young rejected any breach of section 9 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act as having occurred. He did not uphold any specific allegations that the conditions amounted to psychological torture or cruel degrading or disproportionately severe treatment. He said there had been no credible evidence of severe mental suffering but he did find that there had been lesser breaches under section 23(5) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. 
Marc Alexander 
: Does the Minister agree that aside from the actual denial of liberty prisons need to have additional sanctions open to them to discipline prisoners such as Christopher Taunoa who was described by guards as being the most difficult and disruptive inmate they had ever encountered and that such alleged breaches of human rights are sometimes necessary if prisons are to maintain any sense of order? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I most certainly do agree that there needs to be forms of discipline in prisons against recalcitrant prisoners and the person mentioned by the member was certainly one of those prisoners. However those sanctions and that discipline obviously need to be within the rules set by this House. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: Will the court’s decision of 7 April this year on the Crown’s liability arising out of the behaviour modification regime be appealed? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Yes. In fact an appeal has already been filed. 
Marc Alexander 
: Is the Minister concerned by the potential flood of hundreds of cases if those four violent prisoners are compensated for time spent in solitary confinement; and does he agree that this sets a ridiculous precedent whereby inmates may engage in violent and disruptive behaviour on purpose just so they can be rewarded with six-figure payouts later on; if not why not? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: No I do not believe that a precedent will be set—and it will most certainly not be set if the forms of discipline and sanctions imposed within the prison regime are within the Penal Institutions Act of 1954 which was used in this particular case. Another reason why inmates will not be inclined to do this—as there will be no financial incentive for them to do so—is if this House reforms the law so that the first call on any damages given to any prisoner who is wronged goes to the victims the offender has wronged. 
Marc Alexander 
: Is the Minister concerned that if prisons are not able to impose further disciplinary actions on inmates then such an absence of boundaries will have a detrimental effect on their potential rehabilitation particularly in the case of those who are not willing to take responsibility for their actions in the first place like Christopher Taunoa who protests his innocence on all counts and claims he is not a violent person despite evidence to the contrary? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: There is most certainly evidence to the contrary of that inmate’s wrong claims. There are sanctions within prisons; there is also discipline within prisons but it has to be applied within the rules that are there and are of long standing.