Fairbrother Russell: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Fairbrother Russell: Independent Police Complaints Authority Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:641;Page:11527] 
RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) 
: 
 I want to speak to Part 1 and particularly to the commencement part. I would comment that what we are seeing is the evolution of an independent authority. As Dr Worth indicated previously the original Police Complaints Authority was Sir Peter Quilliam followed by Sir John Jeffries who were both High Court judges and well regarded by both sides in any dispute in their courtrooms. But initially of course when they were appointed to the Police Complaints Authority the concept of human rights was still an evolving pattern. The caution with which both fearless judges approached their task reflected not a lack of bravery on their part but an expectation by the public that the police would do no wrong. Of course later on we have found that that is an expectation that when viewed from a distance is easily believed but close up is often very challenged. 
So the Police Complaints Authority when originally appointed had to walk this very difficult line between trying to balance what might be appropriate police behaviour with the public expectation that the police would go about what essentially is a very unpleasant task of apprehending people who are out cheating and deceiving the system and wreaking havoc upon their fellow human beings while all the time passing themselves off as reasonable and sensible citizens of this country. So the Police Complaints Authority was naturally tentative in the work and generally supportive of the police position. But as the authority has evolved and as our understanding of human rights has evolved the Police Complaints Authority has become a little more loud and a little more independent and the current appointments of Justice Lowell Goddard and Judge Michael Lance will lead the new Police Complaints Authority into an era where we can see a nice balance between the rights of the citizens and the obligations of the police to investigate crimes often covered up by deviousness and violence. 
What is significant about the Police Complaints Authority I think is demonstrated by an experience I want to touch on. There is a chap in prison right now called Jules Mikus who is in there for the murder and rape of a 6-year-old girl in Napier. Within a week of that killing one of Napier’s less popular young men—a larrikin who was somewhat unpopular—was identified by the police as being a likely suspect. He was hounded by the police right up to the day of Mikus’ arrest. It drove him around the bend; it ruined his family; his father went to the grave a very broken man. I took the matter to the Police Complaints Authority who in fact reviewed the file and came forward with the opinion that they considered there was enough evidence to charge this man with the murder and rape of that poor girl. It was only the brink of the investigation finally tipping towards Mikus that saved this man from a trial which would have been a very unpleasant trial and a tough one to defend. To this day he may well have been serving a prison sentence for a crime he did not commit. 
The story I am trying to take from that is that the Police Complaints Authority at that time was conducted under the aegis of the police. Of course the senior police officer who investigated it was a very fair man but his bias always was that there were goodies and baddies; the police were inherently good and the people they investigate were inherently bad. If an investigation is started with two sides of the coin such as that—with the right side and the bad side—then any piece of evidence that contains the possibility of several inferences does not need much further detection before an inference is jumped to without anyone having made sure it is logically correct and true. So I welcome an authority that has strong independent people of the nature of Justice Lowell Goddard and Judge Michael Lance because they will bring to this task a finesse and a deft touch that will establish the authority as a powerful force. 
I do not think that this Committee should get too concerned about quorum—about the numbers who sit on the authority. This authority is not a regulatory authority; it is an authority of professional application to very difficult human situations. It requires finely honed judgment and a very very shrewd assessment of human nature. I think we should be more concerned with the quality of the appointments and about ensuring that future appointments reflect the current quality of the judges I have just mentioned. If we get the right people doing this work then this future authority will be a staunch advocate of human rights in this community.