Finlayson Christopher: Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Finlayson Christopher: Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:9926] 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 National supports this bill’s referral to a select committee. I am delighted to hear that it will come to the Justice and Electoral Committee chaired by the very diligent and hard-working member for Waitakere. This bill is a very interesting one and I certainly look forward to working on the legislation. I too commend the Law Commission for its report. It is both very interesting and very readable. I want to say a number of things about sedition and some of the more interesting cases about sedition in this country over the last few years. 
The word “sedition” comes from the Latin “seditio” and in Roman times that meant an insurrectionary separation either political or military civil discord insurrection and mutiny and it has been in English law for many hundreds of years. For example the English Statute of Treasons in 1351 defined many types of offences against the king as treasonable and in 1447 the courts held that to prognosticate or predict the king’s death using magic was treason. As one would expect in the reign of Henry VIII the definition of treason was greatly expanded and an Act in 1534 declared that it was treason to act or write anything to the prejudice slander or disturbance of the king’s marriage to Anne Boleyn. Thankfully by the 19th century there was a more liberal and democratic political environment in England and a changed view of the rights of citizens to express free criticism of the Government. However even in England today sedition is still a common law offence and indeed in recent times the High Court of that country has confirmed that the law still applies to views expressed with a seditious intention. 
In New Zealand the law has been with us for many years—indeed since the Criminal Code Act of 1893 although of course when we became a colony we inherited British common law. The law on sedition was again set out in the Crimes Act of 1908 and I will not go through that now. In 1951 sedition also became an offence under the Police Offences Amendment Act. It was punishable on summary conviction by a term of imprisonment of up to 3 months—and of course that coincided with the 1951 waterfront strike. 
It is important in a speech such as this to recount some of the interesting prosecutions. Probably the most obnoxious case was that brought by the Crown against Te Whiti. As we all know because we debated the Ngati Mutunga claims settlement legislation last year Te Whiti had established a movement for Maori peace and development at Parihaka and led a campaign of passive and peaceful resistance to Maori land confiscations. The following words got him into trouble: “This is the chief quarrel of this generation. … Mine is the land from the beginning. I say to all Kings Governors Prophets and wise men stand up with your weapons to-day but the land will not be released.” For that he was punished in a most horrendous manner. 
Interestingly the history of sedition in the 20th century is really the history of the Labour Party. In 1913 Harry Holland who is buried not far from here in the Bolton Street cemetery made a speech at a strike of waterfront workers in Wellington. He said: “The railway men should not carry free labourers. Let the trains rot and rust.”—in fact that sounds rather like Fay Richwhite when it ran the railways—“The strike was not made by the working classes but by the master classes who are pouring their armed hundreds into Wellington”. For that he was convicted and he served 3½ months of the 12 months’ sentence originally imposed on him. 
During World War I sedition charges were laid against Bob Semple a former member for Wellington East; James Thorn who was Peter Fraser’s biographer; and Peter Fraser himself for speeches made in relation to their opposition to conscription under the Military Service Act. Later on in 1917 a gentleman by the name of Hubert Armstrong who was a miner and later a Minister in the first Labour Government was prosecuted for an anti-conscription speech. In 1921 former Prime Minister Walter Nash was charged with bringing into New Zealand a document entitled  
The Communist Programme of World Revolution 
 and a communist pamphlet both of which were said to encourage lawlessness. He was fined £5. Incredibly the same pamphlet was later discovered in the Parliamentary Library. 
 One of the more interesting cases was in 1922 when the Roman Catholic Bishop of Auckland Bishop Liston was charged with sedition for inciting disaffection against His Majesty and for promoting hostility between different classes of subjects when he spoke at a St Patrick’s Day gathering in Auckland and commemorated those who died for a free Ireland in 1916 when shot or murdered by foreign troops. He was tried but was acquitted because he had recounted what was essentially historical fact. I always thought that Prime Minister Massey and Attorney-General Francis Dillon Bell were behind the prosecution of Bishop Liston but if one reads the excellent text by Nicholas Reid published last year one finds it suggests that that is not so and in fact that the prosecution was incited by the  
New Zealand Herald 
 which of course would be one of the parties that today would be very much in favour of the law against sedition going and also by the former Mayor of Auckland. Interestingly as an aside—given the events of the last week—at his trial his Lordship was represented by Mr P J O’Regan of that great firm now known as O’Regan Arndt Peters and Young one of whose partners today is Garry Evans who has been such a distinguished coroner in Wellington and who has been treated so shabbily in recent days by the Attorney-General which is what one expects from that miserable soul. 
So in the past sedition charges were brought against Maori Labour Party MPs and supporters and Catholics. But then in 2006 there was a very sinister development because in that year Tim Selwyn of Auckland was prosecuted for sedition—among other charges—following emails that called for militant action against the Government’s foreshore and seabed legislation an attack with an axe that broke the glass of the Prime Minister’s electorate office window and the publication of two sets of pamphlets. The jury found the accused guilty and he was sentenced to prison. In essence he was charged with sedition because he had offended the person of the Prime Minister and that really is a very sinister development. 
That is why I maintain the House needs to review this legislation—because who will be next? I am surprised for example that in 2003 the MP for Taranaki - King Country was not prosecuted for sedition for driving Myrtle up the steps of Parliament an action described by Speaker Hunt as “a serious assault on the institution of Parliament”. One would have thought poor old Shane Ardern was Guy Fawkes. Will the Minister of Defence be prosecuted for sedition when he challenges the Prime Minister for the leadership of the Labour Party? In the dying days of this horrible Government anyone who dissents is at risk. These are dangerous and oppressive times to be a New Zealander so let us get this legislation to the select committee before the Government changes its mind and realises what a wonderful instrument the law against sedition is for torturing anyone who dissents. 
National will support the first reading of this bill and its referral to the select committee which I am delighted to see will be the Justice and Electoral Committee. I can see a look of delight on the face of the member for Waitakere because she of course chairs it. We are all very keen to have this issue carefully addressed. As I say the sooner the bill gets to the select committee the better it will be because I am scared of what this Government is capable of doing in the dying days of that wretched horrible lot. The sooner we get this legislation enacted the better it will be.