Chauvel Charles: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeChauvel Charles: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 October 2007. Volume:642;Page:12262. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour): As I am not a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee that considered this bill it has been interesting to sit in the Chamber and listen to the debate concerning the provisions that have been reported back from the select committee. Clearly this is desirable legislation. The justice system in New Zealand’s armed forces is currently governed by legislation that is patently out of date. The armed forces’ justice system needs to be updated and made consistent with international developments in human rights law as well as of course with our own New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. It seems clear from the comments in previous speeches—and as Dianne Yates said earlier—from the evidence of the multiparty support that exists for the legislation that it will better serve our servicemen and servicewomen by applying to them as many of the same rights enjoyed by civilians as are compatible with the military environment.Mr Hayes described the regime relating to the summary procedure on the one hand and the court martial procedure on the other. I would like to speak about some of the significant provisions that appear in Part 4 that set out the preliminary provisions relating to courts martial. Subpart 1 sets out the purposes of Parts 4 to 6. It provides an overview of those parts defines the terms used in those parts and settles the relationship between them and the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971. Supplementary Order Paper 151 recommends that Parts 4 to 6 be a separate bill the Court Martial Bill the purpose being as we have heard to establish the Court Martial of New Zealand as a permanent court of record and to deal with associated matters in stand-alone legislation.Subpart 2 establishes the Court Martial of New Zealand. It can be seen that the Court Martial will be a court of record. It will have all the powers inherent in such a court for the purposes of any proceedings. The Court Martial will sit in divisions each comprising one judge of the court. Each division of the court will be able to exercise all the powers of the court even though its other divisions are exercising any of those powers at the same time. The Court Martial is to comprise the Chief Judge and at least six other judges. The Governor-General is to appoint all the judges including any deputy chief judges. The status of the court is established clearly and consistently with its status as a court of record.Subpart 3 sets out the constitution of the Court Martial for proceedings for the purpose of any trial. It must consist of one judge and either five military members if the proceeding is in respect of an offence for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment or a term of imprisonment of 20 years or more or in any other case three military members. The Chief Judge is to assign a judge for the proceedings. The registrar is to assign the military members in accordance with certain specified eligibility criteria and in light of certain other factors—for example the seniority of the accused and the seriousness of the charge facing the accused. The accused may object to the registrar about the assignment of any person as a military member on the ground that the person might not act impartially or is not in a position to act impartially or is disqualified from membership as a military member. If in that case the registrar accepts the objection made the registrar may assign a substitute military member to fill a vacancy in the military membership of the Court Martial.Subpart 4 is of interest because it specifies the duties of the members of the Court Martial. For the judge those duties include responsibility for ensuring that the trial is conducted in accordance with the bill the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971 and the rules of procedure in a manner that is appropriate for a court of justice. For the military members those duties include responsibility to consider all the evidence admitted by the judge at the trial and to vote impartially on the finding and if necessary on the sentence.Just briefly and to complete the call on this part I draw the attention of the Committee of the whole House to clause 146 which provides that the senior military member must report any command issues that arise during the proceedings to the superior commander who referred the charges to the director of military prosecutions. Clause 147 goes on to prohibit the taking into account of the manner in which a military member performed his or her judicial duties in that person’s career management. It is clear that this part contributes in a significant way by setting out the preliminary matters relating to the constitution of the Court Martial in this way so as to ensure that it is a properly constituted court of record in accordance with the general objectives of the bill.