Goff Phil: Crimes and Misconduct (Overseas Operations) Bill — Second Reading 
Goff Phil: Crimes and Misconduct (Overseas Operations) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11057] 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade) 
: 
 I move  
That the Crimes and Misconduct (Overseas Operations) Bill be now read a second time 
. This bill allows New Zealand to exercise criminal jurisdiction over New Zealand Police personnel and civilians serving overseas as part of a non - United Nations deployment. It covers the situation that has arisen out of the current police deployment under the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands and will also cover future operations of this nature. 
Under current law New Zealand jurisdiction can be exercised for offences committed overseas by New Zealand armed force personnel under the Armed Forces Discipline Act. Police serving overseas as part of a United Nations force are similarly covered under the United Nations (Police) Act. However in other circumstances there is no New Zealand jurisdiction to deal with offences committed by police and civilian personnel serving overseas. They may therefore be subject to prosecution and possible imprisonment by those countries in which they operate. This bill ensures that such personnel will be able to be tried under New Zealand law not under foreign jurisdiction and can be held to account by the laws of our land. It ensures that prosecution takes place in accordance with New Zealand procedures and standards of justice. Equally it ensures that where there is a bilateral arrangement with the receiving State and where a person is immune from prosecution locally that person does not enjoy impunity. 
The Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee—and I understand it has done so unanimously—has recommended that this bill be passed with minor amendments which the Government accepts. A number of issues were considered by the committee. An amendment is recommended so that the New Zealand Police have the power to arrest personnel covered by the bill in order that they can be tried in New Zealand. This complements New Zealand’s power to assert its jurisdiction in respect of such offences. The arrest power will also mirror similar arrest powers contained in the United Nations (Police) Act and the Armed Forces Discipline Act. 
The committee considered whether it was necessary to include a reference to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in the bill but in the end decided against it. I concur with that view. The reference in the bill to the arrest provisions in the Crimes Act means that anyone arrested under this new legislation would have similar rights to those set out in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. 
Another issue was the possible difficulty that might arise with the prosecution of a national of a third country for an offence under New Zealand law that might not exist under the law of that third country. Such a person would be likely to be subject to participation arrangements between the third country and New Zealand that would cover the allocation of responsibility and jurisdiction. It is unlikely that such a situation would arise where a particular offence under New Zealand law was not mirrored by a similar offence under the law of the third country. The bill in any event provides for the Attorney-General to withhold consent to a prosecution under the bill. If the situation outlined above arose the Attorney-General could opt to withhold her consent to such a prosecution if it were judged inappropriate to prosecute that individual. 
A further issue raised in a submission on the bill was whether it would be clear to personnel in a New Zealand overseas operation force what law would be applicable to them. The submission suggested that this might not be the case until after proceedings had been brought. The aim of the bill is primarily to ensure that a person is subject to New Zealand jurisdiction rather than that of the country where he or she operates so that he or she can be prosecuted in New Zealand. Bilateral arrangements between the host and sending States normally make it clear in advance the manner in which jurisdiction will be divided or shared. Further the practice followed by the New Zealand Defence Force and by the New Zealand Police prior to the current Solomon Islands deployment is to provide information to personnel before departure on the legal arrangements for the operation including issues of jurisdiction. They are also informed about the requirement to respect local laws and customs and are normally provided with information about those laws and customs. The provision of such information prior to deployment should be sufficient to address doubts as to what law is applicable to New Zealand personnel. 
Another issue raised was the lack of scope for New Zealand to bring a further prosecution if overseas authorities bring proceedings and the individual in question is subject to a punishment that is more lenient than the one he or she might have received in New Zealand. The bill has been drafted to allow New Zealand to exercise jurisdiction over its personnel serving in operations overseas so that to the maximum extent possible they will face prosecution here rather than in the host State. However if the host State does in a particular case have jurisdiction—as in some instances it may have—for acts committed outside the course of official duties then it would be inappropriate for a person to face a second trial in New Zealand because the penalty was considered too lenient. To do so would be to subject the person to double jeopardy. The same principle is applicable to our defence personnel as set out in the Armed Forces Discipline Act. 
This bill will bring consistency to the law applied to New Zealand personnel serving overseas. It will ensure that our police and civilian personnel serving in the Solomon Islands and in similar future operations enjoy the same protections as defence personnel and police personnel serving in United Nations operations. This is a non-controversial bill. It was agreed to unanimously by the select committee and I commend it to the House.