Twyford PhilSECURITY INFORMATION IN PROCEEDINGS LEGISLATION BILLSecond ReadingHon PHIL TWYFORD (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control) on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I present a legislative statement on the Security Information in Proceedings Legislation Bill.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.Hon PHIL TWYFORD: I move That the Security Information in Proceedings Legislation Bill be now read a second time.This bill forms part of the Government's response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on the Christchurch mosques. The bill touches on important constitutional matters such as the fundamental rights of people to open justice and a fair trial the respective roles of the judiciary and the executive protecting national security and the principles of open government and democratic accountability. This bill provides the courts with a clear and consistent process to manage national security information in both civil and criminal proceedings. Currently there is no clear path for courts to take when national security information is relevant to a case. The courts need to establish a suitable process each time; this can be contentious costly and uncertain.Our current general law does not provide enough assurance that security information can be adequately protected if it needs to be used in court proceedings. This creates domestic and international risks for New Zealand in terms of safety security and international relations. The lack of a clear process for protecting security information in court could lead to the Crown deciding not to bring proceedings or to settle a claim against it.The current law also disadvantages the person who is affected by a decision of the executive that involves national security. The affected person may not fully know the reasons for the decision against them or the full details of a case against them. The lack of full disclosure puts the affected individual at considerable disadvantage if they want to challenge the executive's actions or decisions. Under normal conditions this would not be tolerated in our courts.This bill will help to maintain public confidence in the operation and integrity of the justice system by providing a clear approach to protecting national security information while maintaining principles of fairness and natural justice. The bill will ensure that New Zealand's framework for managing national security information is consistent with comparable jurisdictions where similar legislation is in place. These include Australia Canada and the United Kingdom.I want to briefly highlight the key aspects of the bill that will ensure a fairer process for managing national security information in the courts. The bill will enable closed court substantive hearings but only where the risks of disclosing the national security information justify this departure from ordinary open processes. A closed procedure would take place in a secure court facility with only security-cleared personnel and the judge present. The court would be closed to the public and the media.The non-Crown party will not be present but safeguards in the bill will mitigate this disadvantage. The non-Crown party's interests will be represented by a special advocate. Special advocates are highly experienced security-cleared lawyers who will act in the interest of the person who is not allowed to see the national security information that is alleged to be relevant in their case. The special advocate and the judge would have access to the national security information. The judge would be able to direct that a summary of the information is prepared for the affected person so that they can then instruct the special advocate.In most cases the judge will assess whether the information is national security information as claimed by the Crown. The judge will also decide how the information should be protected in the proceedings. The judge will have a range of options including providing redacted documents to the affected person. The judge may also exclude certain information.In certain cases the judge will not determine whether the information is national security information. This is where the Attorney-General and the Minister of Foreign Affairs certify that information as national security information. This process is intended to be reserved for information of particular sensitivity where certainty is needed to protect the country's security interests and our foreign partner relationships. In these cases the judge can only order that the case is heard in a closed court or that the information is excluded. However even in these cases the judge will be able to see the information that is covered by the certificate.It's important to stress that closed court processes will not be available in a substantive criminal trial. The bill retains the fundamental position that a defendant will always be present during a criminal trial. However the bill does enable a new pre-trial process to enable national security information to be used and protected at a criminal trial.The bill also replaces existing procedures in other legislation where national security information is used in decision making like the Passports Act the Terrorism Suppression Act and the Overseas Investment Act among others. This means there will be a consistent set of protections and procedures where national security information is relevant so that affected individuals have fundamental rights. The bill does not affect immigration proceedings however as immigration will continue to retain its own scheme.In conclusion I want to thank the Justice Committee for their careful consideration of this bill. The bill received cross-party support at the select committee stage and I thank all parties for their constructive participation in the consideration of the bill. I'm confident that this bill strikes the right balance between the need to protect security information and the need to ensure that the fundamental principles of justice are not unjustifiably limited. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): 大家好. The question is that the motion be agreed to.