DOCSLIB.ORG

New Zealand Journal of Public and International

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Zealand Journal of Public and International NEW ZEALAND CENTRE FOR PUBLIC LAW NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL LAW OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL Te Wänanga o ngä Kaupapa Ture ä Iwi o Aotearoa New Zealand Journal of NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS 1 Workways of the United States Supreme Court 1 Work wJusticeays of Ruththe United Bader GinsbuStatesNZCPL rSupremeg OCCASIONAL Court PAPERS Justice2 RuthThe RoleBader of Ginsbu the Newrg Zealand Law Commission Public and International Law NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS 1 W orkwJusticeays of David the United Baragwanath States Supreme Court 2 TheJustice Role Ruth of the Bader New Ginsbu Zealandrg Law Commission Justice31 DavidWLegislatureork wBaragwanathays ofv Executithe Unitedve-The States Struggle Supreme Continues: Court Observations on the 2 The Role of the New Zealand Law Commission JusticeWork ofRuth the BaderRegulations Ginsbu rReviewg Committee 3 LegislatureJustice David v ExecutiBaragwanathve-The Struggle Continues: Observations on the Work 2 ofTheHon the RoleDoug Regulations of Kidd the New Review Zealand Committee Law Commission 3 Legislature v Executive-The Struggle Continues: Observations on the Hon4 DougJusticeThe Kidd Maori David Land Baragwanath Court-A Separate Legal System? W ork Chiefof the Judge Regulations Joe Williams Review Committee 4 TheHon3 Maori DougLegislature LandKidd Court- v ExecutiA Separateve-The LegalStruggle System? Continues: Observations on the Chief 5 JudgeWTheork JoeRole of W the ofilliams theRegulations Secretary Review of the Cabinet Committee-The View from the Beehive 4 The Maori Land Court-A Separate Legal System? HonMarie Doug Shroff Kidd 5 TheChief Role Judge of theJoe WSecretaryilliams of the Cabinet-The View from the Beehive Marie46 ShTheroff MaoriRole of Land the Go Court-vernoAr -GeneralSeparate Legal System? 5 The Role of the Secretary of the Cabinet-The View from the Beehive ChiefDame Judge Silvia Joe Cartwright Williams 6 TheMarie Role Sh ofroff the Governor-General Dame57 SilviaTheFinal RoleCartwright Appeal of the Courts: Secretary Some of Comparisons the Cabinet-The View from the Beehive 6 The Role of the Governor-General MarieLord Cooke Shroff of Thorndon 7 FinalDame Appeal Silvia CartwrightCourts: Some Comparisons Lord68 CookeTheParliamentary ofRole Thorndon of the Scrutiny Governo ofr-General Legislation under the Human Rights Act 1998 7 Final Appeal Courts: Some Comparisons DameAnthony Silvia Lester Cartwright QC 8 PLordarliamentary Cooke of ThorndonScrutiny of Legislation under the Human Rights Act 1998 Anthony79 FinalT errorismLester Appeal QC Legislation Courts: Some and the Comparisons Human Rights Act 1998 8 Parliamentary Scrutiny of Legislation under the Human Rights Act 1998 LordAnthony Cooke Lester of Thorndon QC 9 TAnthonyerrorism LesterLegislation QC and the Human Rights Act 1998 Anthony810 P2002: arliamentaryLester A JusticeQC ScrutinyOdyssey of Legislation under the Human Rights Act 1998 9 Terrorism Legislation and the Human Rights Act 1998 AnthonyKim Economides Lester QC 10 2002:Anthony A Justice Lester Odyssey QC Kim911 Economides Terrorismradition andLegislation Innovation and in the a LawHuman Reform Rights Agency Act 1998 10 2002: A Justice Odyssey AnthonyHon J Bruce Lester Robertson QC 11 TKimradition Economides and Innovation in a Law Reform Agency Hon1012 J Bruce2002:Democracy Robertson A Justice Through Odyssey Law 11 Tradition and Innovation in a Law Reform Agency KimLord EconomidesSteyn 12 DemocracyHon J Bruce Through Robertson Law Lord1113 SteynTHongradition Kong's and LegalInnov System:ation in Thea Law Court Reform of Final Agency Appeal VOLUME 10 • NUMBER 2 • DECEMBER 2012 12 Democracy Through Law Hon JMr Bruce Justice Robertson Bokhary PJ 13 HongLord SteynKong's Legal System: The Court of Final Appeal Hon1214 Mr DemocracyEstablishing Justice Bokhary Through the PJGround Law Rules of International Law: Where To from Here? 13 Hong Kong's Legal System: The Court of Final Appeal LordBill Mansfield Steyn 14 EstablishingHon Mr Justice the BokharyGround PJ Rules of International Law: Where To from Here? Bill1315 Mansfield HongThe Case Kong's that LegalStopped System: a Coup? The TheCourt Rule of Finalof Law Appeal in Fiji 14 Establishing the Ground Rules of International Law: Where To from Here? THIS ISSUE INCLUDES CONTRIBUTIONS BY: 15 The CaseGeoHon thatr geMr WStopped Justiceilliams Bokhary a Coup? PJ The Rule of Law in Fiji V Bill Mansfield George Williams 1714 TheEstablishing Official Information the Ground Act Rules 1982: ofA WInternationalindow on Go vLaw:ernment Where or Curtains To from Drawn? Here? OL 15 The Case that Stopped a Coup? The Rule of Law in Fiji 17 The OfficialStevenBill MansfieldInformation Price Act 1982: A Window on Government or Curtains Drawn? Shireen Daft Cheryl Saunders George Williams Steven1815 PriceLawThe CaseReform that & theStopped Law Commission a Coup? The in NewRule Zealandof Law afterin Fiji 20 Years - We Need to Try 10 EmpowerNZ Anna-Marie Skellern 17 The Official Information Act 1982: A Window on Government or Curtains Drawn? Geoa Littlerge HarderWilliams 18 LawSteven Reform Price & the Law Commission in New Zealand after 20 Years - We Need to Try Carwyn Jones Pádraig McAuliffe a Little 17 HarderTheRt Hon Official Sir GeoffInformationrey Palmer Act 1982: A Window on Government or Curtains Drawn? 18 Law Reform & the Law Commission in New Zealand after 20 Years - We Need to Try Dean Knight and Julia Whaipooti Rt Hon Jim McLay Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Palmer 19 StevenInterpreting Price Treaties, Statutes and Contracts a Little Harder Rt Hon Judge Sir Kenneth Keith 18 Law Reform & the Law Commission in New Zealand after 20 Years - We Need to Try NO Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey PalmerAvailable from the New Zealand Centre for Public Law 20 aRegulations Little Harder and Other Subordinate Legislative Instruments: Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand RtDrafting, HonA Sir vPublication,ailable Geoffr eyfrom Palmer Interpretation the New Zealand and Disallowance Centre for Public Law 2 e-mail [email protected], fax +64 4 463 6365 Faculty ofRoss Law Carter, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand Av ailable e-mail from nzcpl@vu the Neww.ac.nz, Zealand fax Centre+64 4 463 for 6365 Public Law Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand Ae-mailvailable nzcpl@vu from thew.ac.nz, New Zealand fax +64 4Centre 463 6365 for Public Law Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand DECE e-mail [email protected], fax +64 4 463 6365 M BER 2012 FACULTY OF LAW FACUTeL KauhanganuiTY OF LAW Tatai Ture Te Kauhanganui Tatai Ture FACULTY OF LAW Te Kauhanganui Tatai Ture FACULTY OF LAW Te Kauhanganui Tatai Ture NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL LAW © New Zealand Centre for Public Law and contributors Faculty of Law Victoria University of Wellington PO Box 600 Wellington New Zealand December 2012 The mode of citation of this journal is: (2012) 10 NZJPIL (page) The previous issue of this journal is volume 10 number 1, July 2012 ISSN 1176-3930 Printed by Geon, Brebner Print, Palmerston North Cover photo: Robert Cross, VUW ITS Image Services CONTENTS Foreword Claudia Geiringer and Rayner Thwaites..................................................................................... vii Constitution as a Catalyst: Different Paths within Australasian Administrative Law Cheryl Saunders ...................................................................................................................... 143 The Climate Change Response Act 2002: The Origin and Evolution of s 3A – The Treaty Clause Anna-Marie Skellern................................................................................................................ 167 Integrating Responses to Violators and Corporate Accomplices: A Role for the Security Council? Shireen Daft ............................................................................................................................ 193 Suspended Disbelief? The Curious Endurance of the Deterrence Rationale in International Criminal Law Pádraig McAuliffe ................................................................................................................... 227 Book Review: Tribal Constitutionalism – States, Tribes and the Governance of Membership Carwyn Jones .......................................................................................................................... 263 1984 and All That: Opening Address to the EmpowerNZ Workshop Hon Jim McLay ....................................................................................................................... 267 EmpowerNZ: Drafting a Constitution for the 21st Century Dean Knight and Julia Whaipooti ............................................................................................ 287 Draft Constitution for the 21st Century Participants at the EmpowerNZ Youth Workshop...................................................................... 301 The New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law is a fully refereed journal published by the New Zealand Centre for Public Law at the Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington. The Journal was established in 2003 as a forum for public and international legal scholarship. It is available in hard copy by subscription and is also available on the HeinOnline, Westlaw, Informit and EBSCO electronic databases. NZJPIL welcomes the submission of articles, short essays and comments on current issues, and book reviews.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act Aimed to Do, Why It Did Not Succeed and How It Can Be Repaired
    169 WHAT THE NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT AIMED TO DO, WHY IT DID NOT SUCCEED AND HOW IT CAN BE REPAIRED Sir Geoffrey Palmer* This article, by the person who was the Minister responsible for the introduction and passage of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, reviews 25 years of experience New Zealand has had with the legislation. The NZ Bill of Rights Act does not constitute higher law or occupy any preferred position over any other statute. As the article discusses, the status of the NZ Bill of Rights Act has meant that while the Bill of Rights has had positive achievements, it has not resulted in the transformational change that propelled the initial proposal for an entrenched, supreme law bill of rights in the 1980s. In the context of an evolving New Zealand society that is becoming ever more diverse, more reliable anchors are needed to ensure that human rights are protected, the article argues. The article discusses the occasions upon which the NZ Bill of Rights has been overridden and the recent case where for the first time a declaration of inconsistency was made by the High Court in relation to a prisoner’s voting rights. In particular, a softening of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, as it applies in the particular conditions of New Zealand’s small unicameral legislature, is called for. There is no adequate justification for maintaining the unrealistic legal fiction that no limits can be placed on the manner in which the New Zealand Parliament exercises its legislative power.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kiwi That Roared: Nuclear-Free New Zealand in a Nuclear-Armed World
    Wade Huntley THE KIWI THAT ROARED: NUCLEAR-FREE NEW ZEALAND IN A NUCLEAR-ARMED WORLD by Wade Huntley Dr. Wade Huntley is Program Director for Asia/Pacific Security at the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development in Berkeley, California, where he produces the Northeast Asian Peace and Security Network’s Daily Report (www.nautilus.org). He has an article in the March 1996 issue of International Studies Quarterly and is working on a book based on his doctoral dissertation, “The Citizen and the Sword: Security and Democracy in the Liberal State.” The University of California’s Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation provided support for research on this article. n July 14, 1984, New policy was widely criticized as a evance to larger democracies, is that Zealand elected its fourth frivolous moral exercise indulging a mass public is ill-suited to make O Labour government and vocal anti-nuclear activists and play- wise and prudent decisions regard- thus brought into effect its policy de- ing on an impassioned and unin- ing state security. Recent research claring the country “nuclear free,” formed public, while needlessly on this subject indicates that popu- which included prohibiting port entry jeopardizing the country’s national lar opinion is not as volatile and in- by any ships either under nuclear interests and sacrificing its ANZUS coherent, nor its effects on security power or carrying nuclear weapons.1 alliance relationship with the United policy as pernicious, as once The government’s commitment to States.3 This judgment is rooted in thought. However, many of these this policy reached a moment of truth two converging claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
    Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence Editor Dr Claire Breen Editor: Dr Claire Breen Administrative Assistance: Janine Pickering The Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence is published annually by the University of Waikato School of Law. Subscription to the Yearbook costs $NZ35 (incl gst) per year in New Zealand and $US40 (including postage) overseas. Advertising space is available at a cost of $NZ200 for a full page and $NZ100 for a half page. Back numbers are available. Communications should be addressed to: The Editor Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence School of Law The University of Waikato Private Bag 3105 Hamilton 3240 New Zealand North American readers should obtain subscriptions directly from the North American agents: Gaunt Inc Gaunt Building 3011 Gulf Drive Holmes Beach, Florida 34217-2199 Telephone: 941-778-5211, Fax: 941-778-5252, Email: [email protected] This issue may be cited as (2008-2009) Vols 11-12 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence. All rights reserved ©. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act 1994, no part may be reproduced by any process without permission of the publisher. ISSN No. 1174-4243 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence Volumes 11 & 12 (combined) 2008 & 2009 Contents NEW ZEALAND’S FREE TRADE AGREEMENT WITH CHINA IN CONTEXT: DEMONSTRATING LEADERSHIP IN A GLOBALISED WORLD Hon Jim McLay CNZM QSO 1 CHINA TRANSFORMED: FTA, SOCIALISATION AND GLOBALISATION Yongjin Zhang 15 POLITICAL SPEECH AND SEDITION The Right Hon Sir Geoffrey Palmer 36 THE UNINVITED GUEST: THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN AN OPEN DEMOCRACY Karl du Fresne 52 TERRORISM, PROTEST AND THE LAW: IN A MARITIME CONTEXT Dr Ron Smith 61 RESPONDING TO THE ECONOMIC CRISIS: A QUESTION OF LAW, POLICY OR POLITICS Margaret Wilson 74 WHO DECIDES WHERE A DECEASED PERSON WILL BE BURIED – TAKAMORE REVISITED Nin Tomas 81 Editor’s Introduction This combined issue of the Yearbook arises out of public events that were organised by the School of Law (as it was then called) in 2008 and 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England
    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 2002 Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England Susanna Frederick Fischer The Catholic University, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Susanna Frederick Fischer, Rethinking Sullivan: New Approaches in Australia, New Zealand and England, 34 GEO. WASH. INT’L L. REV. 101 (2002). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RETHINKING SULLIVAN: NEW APPROACHES IN AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND, AND ENGLAND SUSANNA FREDERICK FISCHER* "This is a difficult problem. No answer is perfect." - Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead in Reynolds v. Times Newspapers1 SUMMARY This Article employs a comparative analysis of some important recent Commonwealth libel cases to analyze what has gone wrong with U.S. defa- mation law since New York Times v. Sullivan and to suggest a new direc- tion for its reform. In Lange v. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Lange v. Atkinson, and Reynolds v. Times Newspapers, the highest courts of the Australian, New Zealand, and English legal systems were con- fronted with the same challengefaced by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan. They had to decide the proper constitutionalbal- ance between protection of reputation and protection of free expression in defamation actions brought by public officials over statements of fact.
    [Show full text]
  • Ensuring New Zealand's Constitution Is Fit for Purpose
    July 2013 Submission Ensuring New Zealand’s Constitution is Fit for Purpose Submission to the Constitutional Advisory Panel ΞDĐ'ƵŝŶŶĞƐƐ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ>ŝŵŝƚĞĚϮϬϭϯ /^EϵϳϴͲϭͲϵϳϮϭϵϯͲϯϳͲϮ;ƉĂƉĞƌďĂĐŬͿ /^EϵϳϴͲϭͲϵϳϮϭϵϯͲϯϴͲϵ;W&Ϳ WKŽdžϮϰϮϮϮ tĞůůŝŶŐƚŽŶϲϭϰϮ EĞǁĞĂůĂŶĚ ǁǁǁ͘ŵĐŐƵŝŶŶĞƐƐŝŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ͘ŽƌŐ ďŽƵƚƚŚĞDĐ'ƵŝŶŶĞƐƐ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞ The McGuinness Institute is a non-partisan, not-for-profit research organisation specialising in issues that affect New Zealand’s long term future. Founded in 2004, the Institute aims to contribute to the ongoing debate about how to progress this nation through the production of timely, comprehensive and evidence-based research and the sharing of ideas. This can take a number of forms including books, reports, working papers, think pieces, workshops and videos. ďŽƵƚƚŚĞƵƚŚŽƌ Wendy McGuinness Wendy McGuinness is the founder and chief executive of the McGuinness Institute. Originally from the King Country, Wendy completed her secondary schooling at Hamilton Girls’ High School and Edgewater College. She then went on to study at Manukau Technical Institute (gaining an NZCC), Auckland University (BCom) and Otago University (MBA), as well as completing additional environmental papers at Massey University. As a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA) specialising in risk management, Wendy has worked in both the public and private sectors. In 2004 she established the McGuinness Institute (formerly the Sustainable Future Institute) as a way of contributing to New Zealand’s long-term future. She has also co-authored a book, Nation Dates: Significant events that have shaped the nation of New Zealand. tŝƚŚŽŶƚƌŝďƵƟŽŶƐĨƌŽŵ Sylvia Avery Sylvia Avery is a practicing primary school teacher who recently graduated from the University of Otago with a BA in Theatre and Politics and a Graduate Diploma in Teaching (Primary).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction: Aims and Outline
    1 Introduction: Aims and Outline I. The Statutes Outlined .............................................................................6 A. The Canadian Bill of Rights 1960 and Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982 ..........................................................6 B. The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and Human Rights Act 1993 ................................................................12 C. UK—The Human Rights Act 1998 ................................................18 D. Ireland—The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 ........................................................................................23 E. Australian Capital Territory—The Human Rights Act 2004 ........................................................................................29 F. Victoria—Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 ........................................................................................32 G. Australia—Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 ........................................................................................35 II. The Questions to be Explored ..............................................................37 In 1990 the New Zealand Parliament enacted the New Zealand Bill of Rights 1 Act (NZBORA).1 It purported to protect fundamental rights through a statute that did not claim to be a form of higher law: and as such, it did not com- promise the ability of the Parliament to breach those fundamental rights if it so chose, even though that would be contrary to the country’s
    [Show full text]
  • Drafting a Constitution for the 21St Century Dean Knight and Julia Whaipooti
    NEW ZEALAND CENTRE FOR PUBLIC LAW NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL LAW OF PUBLIC AND INTERNATIONAL NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL Te Wänanga o ngä Kaupapa Ture ä Iwi o Aotearoa New Zealand Journal of NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS 1 Workways of the United States Supreme Court 1 Work wJusticeays of Ruththe United Bader GinsbuStatesNZCPL rSupremeg OCCASIONAL Court PAPERS Justice2 RuthThe RoleBader of Ginsbu the Newrg Zealand Law Commission Public and International Law NZCPL OCCASIONAL PAPERS 1 W orkwJusticeays of David the United Baragwanath States Supreme Court 2 TheJustice Role Ruth of the Bader New Ginsbu Zealandrg Law Commission Justice31 DavidWLegislatureork wBaragwanathays ofv Executithe Unitedve-The States Struggle Supreme Continues: Court Observations on the 2 The Role of the New Zealand Law Commission JusticeWork ofRuth the BaderRegulations Ginsbu rReviewg Committee 3 LegislatureJustice David v ExecutiBaragwanathve-The Struggle Continues: Observations on the Work 2 ofTheHon the RoleDoug Regulations of Kidd the New Review Zealand Committee Law Commission 3 Legislature v Executive-The Struggle Continues: Observations on the Hon4 DougJusticeThe Kidd Maori David Land Baragwanath Court-A Separate Legal System? W ork Chiefof the Judge Regulations Joe Williams Review Committee 4 TheHon3 Maori DougLegislature LandKidd Court- v ExecutiA Separateve-The LegalStruggle System? Continues: Observations on the Chief 5 JudgeWTheork JoeRole of W the ofilliams theRegulations Secretary Review of the Cabinet Committee-The View
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Annual Meeting
    Notice of Annual Meeting Notice is given that the Annual Meeting of shareholders of Metlifecare Limited will be held at All Seasons Ellerslie Motor Inn, 95 Greenlane East Road, Remuera, Auckland, on Thursday, 23 October 2008, commencing at 11.00am. ORDINARY BUSINESS Annual Meeting Minutes (Ordinary Resolution) 1. To approve the minutes of the last Annual Meeting held on 1 November 2007. Chairman’s and Chief Executive Officer’s Report and Financial Statements 2. To receive and consider the Chairman’s and Chief Executive Officer’s Report, Financial Statements and the Auditors’ Report for the year ended 30 June 2008. Rotation and Election of Directors (Ordinary Resolutions) 3. In accordance with the Company’s constitution, Hon. James Kenneth McLay, CNZM, QSO and Mr John James Loughlin retire by rotation and being eligible, offer themselves for re-election. Mr Mark Alexander Gibson being appointed during the year by the Board, holds office under the constitution only until the Annual Meeting and being eligible, offers himself for election. (Refer Directors’ Profiles on pages two and three of this Notice.) Auditors (Ordinary Resolution) 4. To record the automatic re-appointment of the Auditors, PricewaterhouseCoopers and to authorise the Directors to fix their remuneration for the current year. VOTING BY PROXY All shareholders entitled to attend and vote at the Annual Meeting are entitled to appoint a proxy to attend and vote for them instead. A proxy need not be a shareholder of the Company. A proxy form is enclosed and, if used, must be lodged at the offices of the Company’s Share Registrar, Computershare Investor Services Limited (see proxy form for the address), not less than 48 hours before the time for the holding of the meeting (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2003 PRESIDENT’S REVIEW
    NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY 107th Annual Report & Statement of Accounts for the year ended 30 November 2003 New Zealand Law Society Council 2003-2004 Back row, from left: Ron Pol (CLANZ President), David Clarke (Wellington DLS Executive Director), Bernie Rowe (for Murray Hunt, Marlborough), John Marshall (Wellington), John Brandts-Giesen (for Tom Weston QC, Canterbury), Alan Ritchie (NZLS Executive Director), Raynor Asher QC (NZLS Vice-President), Paul Coe (Wanganui), Tony Sullivan (Westland), Denys Barry (Gisborne), John Young (for Richard Russell, Southland), Stuart Webster (Hawke’s Bay), Stuart Rose (NZLS Board), Nevin Dawson (NZLS Vice-President to 10/03). Third row, from left: Keith Berman (Auckland), David Burns (Family Law Section Chair), Stephen Bryers (Auckland), Len Andersen (Otago), Jacqui Gray (NZLS Board), Kevin Kilgour (Auckland), Kit Clews (Waikato Bay of Plenty). Second row, from left: Keith de Ridder (for Manawatu), Chris Moore (Property Law Section Chair), Janine McMurdo (Southland DLS Secretary), Anne Stevens (Otago), Kate Davenport (Auckland), Margaret Malcolm (Auckland DLS Executive Director), Benedict Ryan (Waikato Bay of Plenty DLS Executive Officer). Front, from left: Geoff Brodie (Canterbury), Graeme Downing (Nelson), Emma Smith (Taranaki), Sue Styants (NZLS Board), Pam Davidson (Wellington), Christine Grice (NZLS President to 10/03), Ann Wilson (NZLS Vice-President), Chris Darlow (NZLS President from 11/03). Absent: Kerry Ayers (Canterbury), Ken Daniels (Wellington), Warwick Deuchrass (NZLS Vice-President & Treasurer),
    [Show full text]
  • Mcguinness Institute Draft 2X 6
    1984 And All That Hon Jim McLay1 New Zealand Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Opening Address EmpowerNZ Workshop: Drafting a Constitution for the 21st Century Beehive Banquet Hall, Parliament Buildings, Wellington Tuesday 28 August, 2012; 8:30 AM Introduction After that warm introduction from Paul Goldsmith, I should immediately set the record straight and confess that I'm not a professional diplomat. I started out as a lawyer, but I found that wasn't very popular; so I became a politician, and found that wasn't very popular; so I became an investment banker (and we know how popular bankers are!). It's 25 years - almost to the day – since I walked out of this place to discover if there is a life after politics; eventually, to emerge as New Zealand's Ambassador to the United Nations; a diplomatic assignment which basically requires me to do two things– • First, to lead a team of experts – and, when I say "experts", I really mean experts – real specialists in international peace and security, disarmament (nuclear and conventional), human rights, development, environment, funding, legal, oceans, 1 The opinions expressed in this address are mine alone and do not represent the views of the New Zealand Government or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of a number of friends and colleagues who either scrutinised and commented on early drafts of this address and/or offered specific comments for inclusion; notably, Marcy McLay, Denis McLay and Sir Geoffrey Palmer. All added greatly to the substance of this text.
    [Show full text]
  • Ch 1 the Parliament of New Zealand
    Chapter 1 The Parliament of New Zealand The Parliament of New Zealand met for the first time on 24 May 1854 in Auckland. At that time the Parliament was officially styled “The General Assembly of New Zealand”. It consisted of three bodies: the Governor, a Legislative Council and a House of Representatives. Only the House of Representatives, the elected component, has retained its unbroken membership of the Parliament under its original title, though it is now a much larger body, with 120 members, as compared with 37 in 1854. (The 51st Parliament—2014–2017—had 121 members as a result of an electoral “overhang” of one member.) The Parliament of New Zealand today consists of the Sovereign in right of New Zealand and the House of Representatives.1 The Sovereign was not originally mentioned as part of the General Assembly. Legislation was therefore passed in 1953, on the occasion of the Queen’s first visit to New Zealand, to remove any doubt about the Sovereign’s power to give the Royal assent to bills.2 The Sovereign’s powers as part of Parliament are exercised by Her Majesty’s representative, the Governor-General, who assumed this title in 1917. The Legislative Council, which was an appointive rather than elective body, was abolished on 1 January 1951,3 leaving Parliament a single-chamber or unicameral legislature ever since. THE Sovereign and the Governor-General The Sovereign has performed a number of acts as a constituent part of Parliament. These have included: giving the Royal assent to bills that have passed through the House; summoning and proroguing Parliament; delivering the Speech from the Throne at the opening of a session of Parliament; and sending messages to the House of Representatives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Westminster Approach to Prorogation, Dissolution and Fixed Date Elections
    The Westminster Approach to Prorogation, Dissolution and Fixed Date Elections Bruce M. Hicks The Queen has various reserve powers, or personal prerogatives, including prorogation, dissolution and summoning of parliament, and dismissing and appointing a prime minister. The use of these powers is pursuant to unwritten constitutional conventions and are, in theory, the same for all Commonwealth countries that have retained the Queen as head of state. Yet in practice they operate differently – far more democratically – in England, where the Queen is present, than in Canada, where a governor general has been appointed to represent the Queen and manage these powers on Her behalf. This paper examines the British approach, contrasts it with the Canadian, and shows how Canada could improve its democracy by adopting the British practices. ll of governance in Britain was originally prerogatives’, they were left in the hands of the the product of Royal prerogative. In any Queen because no democratic case could be made Amonarchical system, the King owns all the land, for ministers to have control of these powers and a makes all laws, raises armies to defend the people (and strong case could be made that if the Cabinet or the conquer new territories so the wealth of the kingdom Prime Minister had unfettered access to these powers grows), enforces laws and metes out justice. he or they could use them to undermine Parliament’s ability to represent the people and hold the executive Over time, Parliament extinguished many Royal branch to account. After all, Parliament has the only prerogatives of the English King by enacting laws body which the people directly elect, the House of to authorize or limit His power and the activities of Commons; the PM, the Cabinet, the Senate and the His officials.1 The Crown accepted these limits on its courts are all appointed.
    [Show full text]