Source: http://disclosure.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2017/285/
Timestamp: 2020-01-23 07:52:03
Document Index: 402569520

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 7', 'art 1']

Courts Matters Bill – NZ Legislation: Disclosures
Bills » Government » 2017 » 285
Year: 2017 Number: 285 Download PDF (103 KB)
The Ministry certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and understanding, the information provided is complete and accurate at the date of finalisation below.
The Courts Matters Bill and the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill (the Tribunals Bill) form an integrated package of amendments that will contribute towards the goal of a modern, efficient, and effective courts and tribunals system. The Business Committee has agreed to the introduction of these Bills as cognate Bills under Standing Order 269.
Independent, fair, and efficient courts and tribunals are a cornerstone of our democracy. People’s experiences of courts and tribunals shape their views of justice system integrity.
The Courts Matters Bill and the Tribunals Bill amend courts and tribunals legislation respectively to—
reduce the time it takes to hear and resolve matters and to improve users’ experience of the courts and tribunals system:
enable greater use of modern technology to further improve efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness:
simplify and standardise statutory powers and procedures to improve productivity and efficiency:
provide better consumer protection and redress, and greater access to justice.
The Business Committee has agreed to the introduction of the Courts Matters Bill as an omnibus Bill under Standing Order 263(c).
The Courts Matters Bill amends—
the Courts Security Act 1999, to improve users’ experience by making courts and tribunals safer and more secure:
the Criminal Procedure Act 2011, to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of criminal processes:
the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of fines enforcement:
11 other acts to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of the courts.
The major initiatives in the Bill are described below.
Part 1: amendments to Courts Security Act 1999
This Part seeks to improve court users’ experience by making courts and tribunals safer and more secure.
It will expand court security officers’ (CSOs’) powers to enable them to deal with low-level offending and disruptive behaviour in court more effectively.
Giving CSOs more powers to deal with disruptive people
Part 1 authorises CSOs to deny entry to or to remove or to detain people who are intimidating, abusive, or otherwise causing disruption in court. This will include people whose disruptive behaviour is due to the effects of alcohol or other drugs.
The changes reflect best practice drawn from court security legislation in comparable jurisdictions.
Currently, CSOs can only use their powers when there is a credible risk of violence to court users or harm to property. Court security officers cannot use their powers to address relatively low-level disruptive behaviour that is causing distress to other court users or is interfering with the orderly operation of the courts.
Empowering CSOs to detain for a wider range of offending
Part 1 will increase CSOs’ authority to detain people who they believe have committed or attempted to commit a wider range of offences in a court. This power is currently limited to a small number of very serious offences. It does not include common offending such as disorderly behaviour and wilful damage. This limits CSOs’ ability to provide a safe, secure, and orderly court environment. Court security officers need to be able to respond decisively to all offending.
Part 1 will also expand the range of circumstances in which a CSO can detain a person to include—
carrying illegal drugs and associated paraphernalia detected by a CSO during a search:
committing or attempting to commit an offence that a CSO believes on reasonable grounds threatens the safety or security of another person or their property, or may cause serious damage to court premises:
refusing to give a CSO their full name, address, and date of birth after committing an offence on court premises:
refusing to leave the court after being required to do so or attempting to re-enter:
refusing to obey a direction from a CSO to do or not to do anything that is reasonably necessary to protect the safety and security of people being escorted outside the court on court-related business.
Part 1 will also empower CSOs to pursue people who are to be detained, or are in lawful custody, and who flee or otherwise escape from court premises. The power to pursue is authorised while that person is within a short distance of the CSO.
Part 2: amendments to Criminal Procedure Act 2011
Part 2 amends the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 (the CPA) to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of criminal powers and procedures. The key changes are described below.
Re-classifying Category 2 offences as Category 1 offences
Part 2 amends the CPA to re-classify Category 2 offences with a maximum penalty of community work as Category 1 offences. This will increase efficiencies, as, for example, defendants can plead guilty to Category 1 offences by a written notice, whereas defendants in Category 2 cases are required to appear in court.
Broadening powers to issue warrants to arrest
Part 2 amends the CPA so that a judicial officer or Registrar can issue a warrant to arrest for a Category 2, 3, or 4 offence (imprisonable offences), whether or not a summons has been served, in certain circumstances.
The CPA enables the prosecutor, when commencing a prosecution, to seek a warrant to arrest a defendant if reasonable efforts to summons the defendant to court have been unsuccessful. There are a number of situations where service of a summons is an unnecessary or impractical first step. These include, for example, where Police are seeking to extradite a person from overseas for a prosecution commenced in New Zealand or where the Police do not know a defendant’s location.
Part 3: amendments to Summary Proceedings Act 1957
Part 3 will improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of fines enforcement. The key changes are described below.
Authorising automated decision making for time payment arrangements
The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Justice will be authorised to approve automated decision making for imposing attachment orders to collect overdue fines, approving online offers to voluntarily pay fines, and adding further overdue fines to existing payment arrangements.
Most fines are paid through a time payment arrangement. These amendments will improve customer service, productivity and the credibility of fines.
Authorising unilateral and immediate cancellation of voluntary time payment arrangements
Court Registrars will be authorised to cancel voluntary time to pay arrangements for fines (including reparation) when they have genuine and reasonable grounds to do so (for example, if the person provided false or misleading financial information). On appeal, a District Court Judge can confirm, change, or reverse the Registrar’s decision.
New procedures for placing charges on land and forcibly selling land to pay fines
Procedural amendments are made to the ability to impose statutory land charges and orders for the sale of property where defendants have overdue fines of $5,000 or $50,000 respectively.
Part 4: amendments to other Acts
Part 4 amends 11 Acts to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and timeliness of the courts. The key changes are described below.
Reversing the order of inquiries under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003
Subpart 5 reverses the order of the “involvement” and the “fitness” judicial inquiries required by the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 so that the “fitness” inquiry is held before the “involvement” inquiry. Only defendants who are found to be “unfit” will proceed to an “involvement” inquiry. The criminal trial will resume for defendants who are found “fit” to stand trial. This will reduce the burden on victims and other witnesses, who sometimes have to attend and give evidence at both the “involvement” inquiry and the criminal trial (if the defendant is found fit to stand trial).
Simpler and quicker jury processes under the Juries Act 1981
Subpart 7 authorises registrars to excuse potential jurors who are not confident of their understanding of the English language to provide a simpler and quicker process. In addition, court staff will be able to communicate with jurors electronically. Jurors will receive the information they need sooner and by a more convenient method.
Regulatory Impact Statements (RIS) were prepared by the Ministry of Justice in May 2016 on
- reversing the order of inquiries prescribed under the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act for assessing defendants’ fitness to stand trial;
- unilateral cancellation of voluntary time to pay arrangements for fines;
- extending Court Security Officers’ statutory powers to allow them to better address low level offending and disruptive behaviour.
A copy of these RIS can be found at: https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/constitutional-issues-and-human-rights/regulatory-impact-statements/ and http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/informationreleases/ris.
After consultation with the Treasury it was determined that the other amendments were not subject to the regulatory impact analysis requirements because they will have no or only minor impact on individuals, businesses or not-for-profit entities.
Potential costs and benefits were quantified in the Regulatory Impact Statements.
Changes promoted through this Bill are not considered to have specific implications for Māori as individuals, communities or tribal groupings.
The following changes are being made to the jurisdiction of the courts.
Currently a prosecutor can seek a warrant to arrest a defendant if reasonable efforts to summons the defendant to court have been unsuccessful. The Bill will authorise a judicial officer or Court Registrar to issue a warrant to arrest for Category 2, 3, or 4 offence (imprisonable offences), whether or not a summons has been served, in certain circumstances (for example where the location of the defendant is not known).
District Court Judges and Community Magistrates will be authorised to impose a ‘sale order’ – the forcible sale of the defendant’s real and personal property to pay overdue fine/s of $50,000 or more - in the criminal jurisdiction, provided this will not cause undue hardship to the defendant or their dependants. (For example, the defendant’s home will not be able to be sold.)
District Court Registrars will be authorised to register a statutory land charge against land owned by defendants with overdue fine/s of $5,000 or more.
The Bill authorises the collection of additional information to enable electronic communications with jurors.
The Ministry of Justice has undertaken three rounds of consultation.In May 2015, the Ministry undertook targeted consultation on some of the policy proposals with
the Criminal Practice Committee
The responses were generally supportive. The comments received were taken into account when the policy proposals were finalised.
The Ministry consulted with government agencies and departments on the draft Bill. We received a number of comments, which were taken into account in finalising the Bill.
The Ministry is already administering statutory land charges and sale orders for other purposes. These processes will be adapted for the new purpose of District Court fines enforcement.
The Ministry is trialling the automated imposition of attachment orders to the extent possible within the current law. Automatically generated attachment orders are being reviewed and approved by a registrar before issue. This will ensure that the fully automated process is robust when it is implemented following enactment.
The Ministry has developed the necessary business procedures to implement the automated approval of online offers to voluntarily pay fines through time payment arrangements.
The other initiatives either address existing operational issues or will improve the operation of existing processes
Part 1 will authorise:
- the Minister for Courts to extend the application of the Courts Security Act to include further courts and tribunals by amending the meaning of the defined terms - 'court' and 'tribunal'.
- the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Justice to exempt regular court users such as lawyers from the statutory search and screening processes when they enter all or specified courts. The exemption will be able to be cancelled if necessary. All users will benefit from swifter search and screening.
The bill amends the regulation making power in the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 to authorise additional methods of service to be approved by regulations. This will avoid the need for further amendments to authorise the adoption of new technologies in future.
(The Act already authorises electronic service. This amendment is intended to cover future unforeseen technologies that fall outside the scope of this provision.)