Pillay Lynne: Succession (Homicide) Bill — Third Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Succession (Homicide) Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12193] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I rise to speak in support of the Succession (Homicide) Bill at its third reading. Again as I did in my former speech I acknowledge the assistance from the members of the Justice and Electoral Committee and also the hard-working support team staff and advisers and a number of people who assisted with this bill. It was a difficult bill because it is not the most pleasant of subjects to be dealing with in a select committee. The principle that no one should profit by being a killer is not exactly a subject that one finds the most enjoyable to discuss at a select committee. Despite that I believe it is a very important bill because as the previous speaker Hone Harawira said it is really repugnant to think that someone would go through the act of killing somebody and then profit from that action. It is certainly a settled principle in New Zealand law that that is the case but this legislation is really to clarify those uncertainties that could often have led to quite costly and time-consuming litigation at a time when family members and friends are under considerable stress distress and anxiety. For those people to have to go through a process around those uncertainties at that time is not a good thing so I am really pleased that this bill clarifies those uncertainties. 
Again the legislation is based on work that the Law Commission carried out this time in 1997 in which it recommended clarifying and codifying the law in regard to homicide. The bill is a very clear following of the Law Commission’s recommendations. A perpetrator who intentionally or recklessly kills another person or an unborn child will now be excluded from any profit from that act. Such people will not be able to run an argument that they should be entitled to profit—that exclusion is quite absolute. Thus the property of the deceased will be distributed as if that killer had died before the victim so the killer is in no way eligible. Those who kill by negligence or in other ways such as suicide pacts or assisted suicide will not necessarily be excluded from profiting. That is because they are not so morally repugnant as I guess a cold-blooded killer. Also those who kill their abuser—battered women or children for example—will also be able to profit if they are found not guilty of murder. 
So those are the few instances where they are— 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: What if they are found guilty? 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: That is just a silly question from a silly person over the other side of the House. At the time of quite a serious bill that member is sitting there chattering away and calling out silly comments like that. He should just be ashamed of himself. I think it is appalling I really do. I stood in this House before talking about women’s rights and had another inane butting-in from that member on that instance. I think that if he perhaps concentrated on trying to find out what his party’s policies were and stopped chipping in and making a fool of himself in this House things would be a bit better for everybody. 
To go back to the bill I say that if someone is convicted of homicide the bill uses that conviction as conclusive evidence that the killer was criminally responsible for the victim’s death. That clarifies things very well. The Wills Bill was recently passed by this House and it was considered by the Justice and Electoral Committee. That legislation alongside this bill improves the framework governing succession law. 
I really cannot think of much more to say except that I am really pleased to see this bill go through its third and final reading. The submission process was quite emotional at times but everybody in this House would accept that the last thing that a family needs when it is mourning the loss of a loved one is a legal debate over the distribution of the estate and particularly a legal argument with the very killer who was responsible for the death of their loved one. I believe that this legislation will reduce the number of disputes in these instances and also reduce the scope of any disputes that arise. It is with pleasure that I stand in this House and commend this bill. Thank you.