Turei Metiria: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Turei Metiria: Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7496] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I shall take a short call on the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Amendment Bill. It is opposed by the Green Party. It has been opposed by the Green Party the whole way. The fact that this bill is contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the Attorney-General’s report states that it has significant human rights abuses is of extremely serious concern to the Greens and should be to Parliament as a whole. The forcible taking of DNA samples where the police only intend to charge a person—the person has not been convicted of any offence—is a gross assault on that person. Under any other circumstances but for it being authorised in law that would constitute an assault against that person. The Green Party does not believe that the law should be authorising assaults against a person simply because the police say they intend to charge that person with a crime where there is no evidence to suggest that that person will be convicted of that crime. 
I would like to reiterate the point or support the points made by Charles Chauvel about the serious concern that there will be no judicial oversight of the forcible taking of these bodily samples from citizens of this country. He set out a very clear description of the importance of judicial oversight in this matter the fact that the law provides for that already and that there does not seem to be any reason why that should change; it is obviously working currently. It does raise a concern for me too as to why Labour is supporting this legislation despite the very clear concerns by Labour and by Labour members for the breach of human rights the lack of judicial oversight and in regard to young people and to Maori and to others of other ethnic minorities the risk of abuse by the police against those communities. I would urge Labour members to rescind their view and to oppose this legislation for all of the good reasons that Labour itself has put out in the debate over the last day or so. 
Another concern of mine is around systemic bias racism that exists within the legal system. At least two good studies one produced by the Department of Corrections and the other by the Christchurch medical school I think in 2003 clearly showed that the legal system contains bias against Maori and that that bias leads to an overrepresentation of Maori in various parts of the legal system. The Department of Corrections study looked at a number of factors. Despite all the other social indicators it concluded that there is a degree of overrepresentation related solely to the ethnicity of Maori at key points in the legal system. Although at each of those key points the overrepresentation might be small none the less the cumulative effect of that bias is exacerbated over time. 
One of those areas is arrests. This was proven by the subsequent Christchurch study which looked at cannabis arrests and convictions. It found that despite all other risk factors such as a person’s being known to the police Maori men are still more likely than anyone else to be stopped arrested and convicted of cannabis offences. That is despite all other risk factors including frequency of use for example. It shows that the police are more likely to stop Maori men. It proves that. Now with this bill there will be no need for a conviction before a DNA sample is taken. The police have been trying to do some good work on the issue of systemic bias and to deal with it internally but they have not fixed it. Systemic bias within the police still occurs in various parts of the legal system. With this bill the police are able to take a DNA sample based simply on an intention to charge. Maori will be proportionally more likely to suffer from that forcible assault than others in the community. 
This legislation is a form of enactment of systemic racism against Maori communities. Cam Calder can sit there and wave his hands about and think that that is perfectly fine but what he cannot do is find the evidence to the contrary because the evidence proves that such systemic racism and bias is in the system. It may be small but for the individuals and whanau who suffer from it the effects are considerable. It cannot be denied by anyone in this House that those families suffer as a result. 
The changes in this bill also undermine the protections of young people in particular. I am especially disturbed to see that the police will be able to nominate a person to come and support a young person from whom a bodily sample is to be forcibly taken. It should not be for the police to decide who a support person for a young person in that circumstance should be. It is for the young person and for his or her whanau to decide yet the police will be given the power to make that decision in this bill. 
I also highlight the other changes in the process around law enforcement that exacerbate the concerns I have about this bill. One is the concept of mobile justice units which was proposed in September of this year I think. Police will be able to not only arrest and charge people but also convict people on the street from the back of their cop car and they will be able to take various pieces of evidence from people. Presumably now they will also be able to take bodily samples from people as a means of managing what is called mobile justice. This gives the police an extraordinary power. Not only do the police have the power to stop people and to arrest and charge them—and it is reasonable that enforcement agencies are able to do that kind of work—but also the police will now have a judicial role as they will be able to decide whether to convict people and they will be able to fine them or otherwise punish them for that crime. This bill continues to increase the powers of the police by enabling them to have a mobile justice unit in the back of cop cars and now the police can forcibly assault people and take bodily samples while only intending to charge them. The power of the police in these circumstances is enormous. It is incredible. 
Last night I heard some National members going on about extreme cases and that is fine. But we are talking here about perfectly ordinary citizens who have not committed a crime who find themselves in a situation where the police might for some reason or another want to talk with them because of a concern around a crime forcibly assault them take bodily samples from them and never charge them. Perfectly ordinary New Zealanders who are going about their lawful business and who might just have been in the wrong place at the wrong time will find themselves being assaulted by the police. That is the consequence of this legislation. There is no doubt that the taking of bodily samples DNA from those who have been charged—for example where there is real concern about the possibility of their being involved in other crimes—might be the way to resolve some of those issues. There is an argument that can be made there but not when the police are simply allowed by this legislation to roam around the country finding people with whom perhaps they have a problem or perhaps finding ordinary law-abiding citizens who have never been in trouble but have found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time and who are forcibly assaulted by the cops who have no intention of charging them but who can use the measures in this bill as a way of getting through it. 
Many of our police do a fine job and are working to improve the culture of the police but it is not improved yet; it is not fixed yet. Until it is giving the police these kinds of powers is an abuse of their power and it is an abuse of citizens. It puts the majority of citizens at risk of the abuse of this power. This bill provides no protection for those people. It is clearly a breach of human rights and enacts systemic racism into our system. Thank you.