Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Locke Keith: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:9313] 
11.  
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: Does she agree in light of the Ahmed Zaoui case that the “framework for issuing security risk certificates … has been shown to have serious flaws”; if not why not? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 No. This is the first case that has tested Part 4A of the Immigration Act inserted in 1999. Given that the hearing of the appeal to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security which was made at the end of March this year has not even begun yet it is too early to draw conclusions about whether there are any flaws in the process. 
Keith Locke 
: Does she agree with the  
New Zealand Herald  
editors that to deny Mr Zaoui even a summary of the accusations against him—as the Inspector-General has so far decided—is a breach of natural justice and against the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act; if not why not? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No I do not agree with the  
New Zealand Herald 
’s 
editorial any more than I agreed with the  
New Zealand Herald 
’s 
decision to print the man’s name and his photograph after my specific request not to do so back in December last year. 
Dianne Yates 
: How are the individual’s rights in cases involving national security balanced with the public interest when classified security information cannot be released? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Section 114A of the Immigration Act which sets out the objects of Part IVA states that the balance is best achieved by allowing an independent person of high standing to consider the classified security information and approve its proposed use. The Ministry of Justice vetted the bill that brought in this part and after some changes were made to the original draft it considered that it achieved overall consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act thus there was no requirement to report in terms of section 7 of the Act. That is another reason why I do not agree with the  
New Zealand Herald. 
Keith Locke 
: Is she aware that in other Western jurisdictions there is an allowance for a summary of the classified information without endangering the safety of any person who is a source to be provided to the accused person and that such a provision is in section 38 of our Terrorism Suppression Act passed by Parliament last year; is not this in contradiction to what she has just said and why does she not support a summary of the classified information being provided to Ahmed Zaoui? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: My understanding is that a summary was in fact included in the interlocutory decision of the Inspector-General. I make the point to that member that the Security Intelligence Service cannot operate effectively without cooperation from overseas counterparts. Overseas intelligence agencies require the service to give cast-iron guarantees that certain information supplied by them will be kept confidential. That is a quote from the from the Ministry of Justice compliance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act report and I am happy to table it in the House. 
Keith Locke 
: Will the Minister apologise to Ahmed Zaoui’s lawyers for attacking them for pursuing all possible legal avenues particularly in the light of very strong criticism from the Law Society of her attack on the lawyers; and is it not the lawyers’ duty to do everything possible for Mr Zaoui who faces possible torture and death back in Algeria if the refugee status he now has is finally overridden by the security risk certificate process? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: The point I was making was that it was a bit rich for the lawyers to be arguing that his continued detention was the fault of the Government when in fact they were the cause of the delay in having this matter heard. As I said the appeal was lodged in March this year. It was deferred until after the Refugee Status Appeals Authority decision and there have been further interlocutory matters. I draw that member’s attention to the rules of professional conduct for barristers and solicitors which state: “A practitioner should not make any statement to the news media relating to proceedings which have not been concluded which may have the effect of or may be seen to have the effect of interfering with a fair trial.” 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Speaking about these lawyers and Mr Locke for that matter can the Minister tell me firstly how many fundamentalist Islamic countries did Zaoui pass on his way from his place of origin to New Zealand and secondly what is the exact cost now to the New Zealand taxpayer of having this person in our country? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I do not have that information with me although I do have a copy of the Refugee Status Appeals Authority decision. If the member wants to look through that he will see that it makes it very clear which countries Mr Zaoui travelled in. He left Algeria I believe some 10 years ago. He had been living in Malaysia for a number of months if not years before he chose New Zealand. He selected New Zealand as the destination which is made very clear in the decision. In respect of an update on the amount of costs I understand that they are over $60000. 
I seek leave to table the Ministry of Justice compliance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act report of 12 August 1998. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.