Hayes John: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes John: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 10 October 2007. Volume:642;Page:12260. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa): I am interested in the comments of the previous speaker Ron Mark which I think reflect the fact that the Armed Forces Law Reform Bill has not been read by him.I rise to speak on Part 2 “Courts Martial Appeals Act 1953”. First I would like to explain that one of the reasons the select committee had to address this issue was that there were different systems of disposal. Disposal means getting rid of a charge or dealing with a charge and the navy had a different system to the army and the air force. The system was far too complex and provided no consistency in all strategic environments.The second problem was that as summary disposals were conducted by officers in command rather than in the courts it was not contemplated that an accused be legally represented and there would be no appeal from a finding or punishment to a higher court. That provision was questioned by a number of people in my electorate who are retired military personnel. They were concerned that we would get a de-linkage between a person committing an offence and the officer imposing a penalty for whatever the offence was. Amongst some of the shall we say older guard there were some reservations about this.We also felt that there was no ability to deal summarily with minor charges against senior officers. The resulting requirement to convene a general court martial to try those officers for minor offences was considered to be both inefficient and unwarranted and an unnecessary amount of public expenditure was involved. Up until the enactment of this legislation that we are now passing including today the courts martial are convened by senior officers in command who approve the charges and also appoint the prosecutor and members of the court—that is the military officers who perform as a judge and jury might in a civilian court. In the minds of the select committee members this structure raised doubts about the independence of the court given the status of the convening officer as a member of the executive combined with the responsibility for the prosecution and the appointment of court members.The efficiency and effectiveness of the military system is affected by the fact that the Judge Advocates—read that in terms of being a military judge—have no power first of all to determine evidential and procedural matters or to grant bail. In a situation where a person was awaiting either a judgment or verdict or even charges he or she could not be offered bail. That was all pretty unreasonable. For the first time in our New Zealand military law this bill provides a common system of summary discipline that is far more efficient than the status quo and which at the same time complies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. It will promote measures that should enhance public confidence in the disciplinary regimes of the army navy and air force.I think also that the proposed disciplinary system in Part 2 will maximise efficiencies in the trial process while complying with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and will promote measures that should enhance everybody’s view of military justice. The bill will also establish a permanent Court Martial here in New Zealand to replace the current ad hoc courts martial. The Court Martial will try those cases that are far too difficult for just passing off to summary trial.Finally Part 2 will make a number of reforms to military law that first of all will improve compliance of courts of inquiry with commonly understood principles of justice. Part 2 will also close the gaps in the application of military law to modern operational circumstances. Finally it will produce a modern military justice system thatin all respects is efficient effective and fair to New Zealanders who serve in the armed forces. Our men and women who do that deserve that situation as a very minimum. I particularly want to thank Minister Goff for arrangements he made in a bipartisan way for members of our select committee to visit HMNZSPhilomellast week. Thank you.