Flavell Te Ururoa: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — Second Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12175] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Tena tatou katoa. Hei whaiwhai haere i te ia o te korero i tenei po ko taku noa ake ko te tautoko i nga poroporoaki ki tera o nga tama i ngau nei i rongo nei i te ahuatanga o aitua i te wiki kua hipa ake. Ko ia tenei e whai nei i te ahuatanga o te Whakahuihui Vercoe o Hirini Jackson i nga marama kua hipa. Ehara i te mea he haerenga mokemoke tenei. 
E te uri o te whanau o Solomon koutou ko te whanau Karkeek te taonga o te mate Byron moe mai. moe mai moe mai ra. 
Me penei rawa te korero waiho ko te hunga mate ki te hunga mate. Anei tatau te hunga ora e wananga nei i nga korero i nga take o te wa. Huri noa i te Whare i tenei po tena koutou tena koutou kia ora tatou. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
By way of following up the trend of the talk this evening my part is merely to support the tributes of farewell to that son who died last week. Indeed he follows Whakahuihui Vercoe and Hirini Jackson who passed away in the months gone by. This is therefore not a lonely journey for him. 
To you Byron treasure of death and relative of the Solomon family and you of the Karkeek family slumber there lie there rest there.  
Leave the dead to the dead is the saying. Here we are the living debating the issues and matters of the day so greetings to you greetings to you and greetings to us throughout the House tonight. 
] 
Kia ora tatou. Kei te tangi tonu te ngakau. 
[ 
Greetings to us. The grief inside continues. 
] 
As we mourn with the Carkeek and the Solomon whanau in the loss of their beloved son the able seaman Byron James Solomon it is to be noted how the values that came forth this last week—the values of bravery of courage and of heroic strength—are the same values that we commonly expect our armed forces to display every day every week. I have no intention of talking about the detail of this sad case other than to highlight the relevance of the Armed Forces Law Reform Bill in reforming the military justice system in such a way as to ensure consistency fairness efficiency discipline and justice. He tika tonu tera mo Byron me pera ka tika. Byron James Solomon deserves nothing less. 
Under the current system as I understand it legal representation would be excluded from courts of inquiry in all cases in the armed forces. Some of the submitters to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee whom I heard about expressed the concern that this exclusion is inconsistent with the right to natural justice and that the accused should be entitled to legal representation at the summary trial. Mr Fairbrother talked a little bit about that. The Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee I read concluded that in a situation in which a service member is facing a jail sentence if the disciplinary officer at least advises the accused of the right to legal representation in electing summary trial then that would satisfy the requirements for fairness and the need to maintain discipline. The crucial point is that the opportunity to benefit from legal representation is at least offered. 
The Maori Party does however share the concerns of the submitters in cases in which a sentence of being locked up is not going to be imposed. It would appear that this bill suggests that the right to legal representation is not relevant in these circumstances. Yet where a sentence is likely to lead to people being locked up those involved are offered and can have representation. So the question is how we can be assured that discipline fairness and accountability are maintained. Will we be seeing those subjected to disciplinary procedures having the nature of justice ranked and therefore having access to legal representation denied? The Maori Party knows full well about the nature of justice being denied—the damned Foreshore and Seabed Act showed us all about that. But another question we would ask is: if it is deemed that the accused does not require legal representation because the charge may be of little consequence why lay the charge in the first place? 
This is a very important bill. It is an opportunity to ensure that the armed forces—and consequently the regular force Territorial Force servicemen and servicewoman and civilian staff across the navy the army and the air force—are entitled to better human rights protections when encountering the military justice system. The bill is also important in taking explicit account of international human rights laws. This is a welcome change from the Government which has shown a little bit of disregard in terms of indigenous human rights as is apparent in its rejection of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples less than a month ago. 
But to put that aside I say that a particularly positive proposal is the recommendation that the bill be amended to provide that all judges of the Court Martial of New Zealand are appointed in the same manner as the Chief Judge. It is a proposal that endorses the constitutional value of the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive. It is also positive to see that the proposed terms of appointment and tenure of military judges are to be consistent with practice in Commonwealth jurisdictions—specifically the United Kingdom Australia and Canada. The separation of powers doctrine is an important means of maintaining accountability fairness and liberty which in effect ensures that each branch of Government by being kept separate places a check on the other. This principle of independence has also shaped the decision by the select committee to make the supervisory powers of the Solicitor-General over the director of military prosecutions less rigid. 
In much the same way we welcome the inclusion of clause 151 to reintroduce provisions to enable an accredited news media reporter to have access to courts martial. We were interested in the advice of the Media Freedom Committee of the Commonwealth Press Union which inevitably drew attention to the issue of public interest associated with military transgressions. The comment that “the best sunlight is disinfectant” caught my eye. If we are at all committed to removing any bacteria corruption or disease of injustices that may occur in courts martial then I suspect that media exposure is one sure way of achieving this. Our armed forces must be open towards upholding the highest codes of personal integrity and accountability and the freedom of disclosure of information through the media is a key means of promoting this. 
Mind you I am always worried about the looseness of interpretation with phrases such as that information should be prevented that “might otherwise be harmful to New Zealand” as we see in the report from the select committee. One might say that the reporting of a particular rugby game last weekend might otherwise be harmful to New Zealand or indeed the exposure to the fact that New Zealand is one of four countries that opposed the good judgment of 143 other countries across the world to support indigenous human rights in the recent actions of this Government in rejecting the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 
In considering the notion of harm we are supportive of the intention for a 24-hour grace period to be established in relation to the accused electing trial by court martial. The space for the accused to consider the full implications of his or her decisions—a cooling-off period if you like—and a new offence created to punish any officer who attempts to improperly influence the service member during this time are both useful additions to the legislation. That time to reflect and to contemplate the full ramifications of the decision to go to trial by court martial we believe will only benefit the process in preventing hastily made and easily regretted decisions. 
The pursuit of justice is also facilitated through amendments to clause 38 which put in place procedures by which the accused can be advised of the right to appeal. The appeals system is a particularly important innovation to ensure consistency across all strategic environments. Currently the New Zealand Defence Force is characterised by two different summary disposal systems. There has been an absence of an appeals system which is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. This bill rightly corrects this error. 
I believe that three particular events of recent occurrence are appropriate to refer to in the context of this bill. The first is the heroic rescue undertaken by the Royal New Zealand Air Force’s Orion crew who on the weekend saved the lives of six fishermen by rescuing them from their boat that was drifting north of Tonga. The Royal New Zealand Air Force is responsible for search and rescue operations within New Zealand’s maritime search and rescue area which encompasses some 6 million square miles including much of the South Pacific. As such the saving of lives is if you like part of its core business. 
The second event was the diversity award won by the New Zealand Defence Force in the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust’s annual Work and Life Awards in Auckland last month. That policy was explained by the human resource manager Laura Gillan as aiming to tackle “the pervasiveness of masculinity in the military culture and the pressures put on women to conform to the masculine set of values and standards”. 
The third event of course is the exceptional act of bravery that saw Corporal Willy Apiata honoured in New Zealand with the Victoria Cross for his actions while serving in Afghanistan in 2004. This Ngapuhi hero risked a direct line of fire to save the life of a comrade then carried his mate across 70 metres of broken rocky fire-swept ground while facing the glare of enemy battle fire before returning to counter-attack. Those are three events that represent the capacity to upskill and to change with the times the courage and capability to demonstrate remarkable leadership and the highest personal integrity and the selfless service of those who truly know the value of human life. 
We in the Maori Party hope that in supporting this Armed Forces Law Reform Bill the principles guiding the reform of New Zealand’s military justice system are aligned with the gallantry and inspiration that its own servicemen and servicewomen live by. We are heartened in this by the view of the New Zealand Law Society that the bill represents a principled attempt to find the right point of balance between the requirement of discipline in the armed forces and the requirement of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Kia ora tatou.