Harawira Hone: Judicature Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
Harawira Hone: Judicature Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1766] 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 At Waitangi this year a Samoan friend of mine defined our current political process as “demo-crazy”. With criminal and civil appeals increasing a growing queue of appeal cases and an increasing risk that people’s access to justice is being denied my friend is not far off the mark. The Judicature Amendment Bill (No 3) aims to ease workload pressures on the Court of Appeal increase the number of Court of Appeal judges make the delivery of judgments easier allow appeals all the way to the Supreme Court and increase access to the Supreme Court. The Maori Party supports increased access to justice and the better use of existing resources but we note that community involvement in the judicial process and greater access to restorative justice are not addressed in the bill. The denial of justice is what brought the Maori Party to Parliament and that same quest for justice helps to guide our thinking on this bill. 
The Maori Party will work towards the elimination of poverty and injustice and the promotion of a fair and just society. We sincerely hope we can call on everyone else in the House to assist us in those efforts. Everyone in Aotearoa has the potential to be a positive contributor to our wider society but we destroy that potential by continually arresting charging convicting and jailing people and then rearresting them and continuing the cycle without taking steps to break it. The need to broaden access to our Court of Appeal is a direct result of the lunatic “lock ‘em up and throw away the key” policy that the Government has forced upon us. 
We should not even have to consider the bill. But because we choose to put people in jail we open the door for more appeals we create the extra workload and then we have to pass even more laws to deal with an already overloaded judicial process. I have to ask when this will stop. When do we say enough? Our jails are already full and our budget has already blown out due to the building of new prisons so when do we stop this “lock ‘em up” lunacy? 
Easing workload pressure on the Court of Appeal deals only with the symptom of a bigger problem. But neither this bill nor others currently before the House address the reasons for the increase in convictions that create the extra workload. Instead of just throwing more rules into the mix in a sad and wasted attempt to stop growing crime and to prop up an overloaded judiciary we should be bold enough to say that we have got it wrong and that we should try something new. Maybe it is time we had a good hard look at our justice system and admitted that it is causing our whole society more grief than resolution. Maybe it is time we looked elsewhere for answers. 
Real justice is all about taking responsibility for each other. If any of our mokopuna play up on the marae we sort it out. We do not ring Child Youth and Family Services or the Ministry of Social Development or anybody else. It is about collective ownership and responsibility. It is about whanau and it is about justice. 
The bill says that it will deal with the growing list of appeals that is causing workload pressure on all staff judges lawyers and clients. But the bill does not deal with the underlying issues that create the workload pressure in the Court of Appeal. Also the bill does not deal with our responsibility to create to build and to improve a society based on fairness and justice. All the bill does is put a patch on a sore that is quickly turning into a festering wound and that threatens to spread into a full mutilation of our society. 
The bill also gives us a chance to see where Maori fit in the judiciary and I have to say that two recent examples give us cause for concern about the Government’s lack of respect for Maori in the judiciary. Funnily enough both of those examples arose out of the Foreshore and Seabed Act. In March 2004 the Government stepped over the line of political neutrality when the then Attorney-General and the Prime Minister both accused Judge Caren Wickliffe of bias for allowing East Coast Maori to have their foreshore and seabed claims heard by the Maori Land Court. They accused Wickliffe of a conflict of interest simply because she was of NgatiPorou and RongoWhakaata descent. Six months later they dropped those accusations but the damage had already been done. Given the extensive nature of whakapapa that would make it impossible for any Maori judge to hear a case in which another Maori was involved. Then just last year former Attorney-General Michael Cullen accused Joe Williams Chief Judge of the Maori Land Court of passing documents to the media about a foreshore and seabed claim. Ironically his claim came just a week after Dr Cullen had insisted he would defend judges against criticism from MPs. Obviously he was referring only to non-Maori judges. As it turned out the documents Dr Cullen was referring to were obtained by a journalist who simply rang the court registrar and asked for them. 
It seems that the bill while calling for an increase in the number of judges for the Court of Appeal should probably preface its advertisements with the words: “Maori need not apply.” In the face of such hostility Maori judges do us all proud by continuing to deliver judgments of insight and political courage. Hopefully their judgments will have changed thinking and helped to move our nation forward. 
In 1990 during the Treaty’s 150th anniversary Eddie Durie the then Chief Judge of the Maori Land Court gave the nation a new term when he said: “We must remember that if Maori are the tangata whenua—the original people—then Pakeha are the tangata tiriti—those who belong to the land by right of the Treaty.” In 2005 former Maori Land Court Judge HetaHingston caused major waves when he described the Government’s actions regarding the Foreshore and Seabed Act as “the tyranny of the minority by the majority”. He also said: “Their position that public access would be jeopardised is complete ignorance. Essentially what the Government has done is take away from Maori. Quite simply it is another case of raupatu—it is confiscation.” 
Such forthright statements are not new. Indeed Howard Carr of Ngati Kahungunu who was the first Maori judge of the Native Land Court became a very forceful advocate for Maori rights to the Waikaremoana block in Tuhoi. He called the Crown’s actions “appalling” and called for better treatment for Maori. It is that expert opinion and guidance from Maori judges who sit on the highest benches that helps to shape contemporary views of Maori issues and that is the type of thinking this nation needs if we are to respect the right of the judiciary to be separate from the executive. That is also the courage and the free expression that this nation needs to help guide its future. 
The Maori Party does not support this bill because like the Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) it accepts the burgeoning arrest conviction and imprisonment problems that riddle our society as being part of the natural order of things. The Maori Party does not support this bill because it does not deal with those elements that will see Maori become the most imprisoned people in the world in less than 5 years. The Maori Party does not support this bill because it does not reflect the fact that for many thousands of Maori and Pasifika citizens more judges will not mean more justice—neither will easing workload pressure on the Court of Appeal allowing appeals to the Supreme Court or increased access to the Supreme Court—for the very simple reason that Polynesians simply do not have the financial capability to engage experienced high-cost lawyers to ensure that they can actually get justice. Changing our nation at a more fundamental level is required if we are to get ourselves off this horrendous carousel of pain and accusation and that is a responsibility we all face. Tena koutou katoa. 
Bill read a second time.