Security Information in Proceedings Legislation Bill

Members, we come now to Part 3, which is the debate on clauses 29 to 47 and schedule 2, the “Security information in civil proceedings”. The question is that Part 3 stand part. I call on Chris Penk.

Thank you, I thought you might, and I thank you for it. Really, just in relation to Part 3, I mean it’s probably worth noting for anyone following along, this is the civil proceedings, as opposed to criminal proceedings. It’s still important. There might be security information that is swirling round, and the conduct of a person might explain their actions, might explain their rights and responsibilities in relation to a matter that’s actually just civil in nature; it’s not that they’ve done anything wrong, or even potentially done anything wrong, under the criminal law, but, nevertheless, the information has to be out there because it might explain why they’ve done a thing or not done a thing that they should have done.

So any thoughts the Minister the Hon Kiritapu Allan can provide about the difference between this civil regime versus the criminal would be helpful, but, you know, not particularly asking for a long exposition either. I just think it’s interesting to note that we’re covering both sides of the civil-criminal divide.

The member is doing very well tonight in his line of inquiry; well done. So, yes, turning to the security information in civil proceedings, Part 3 of the bill, the right to natural justice is fundamental to the integrity of our justice system. The bill has safeguards to protect the rights of affected parties and is consistent with the rights and freedoms in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

Where an application is made for information to be treated as national security information, the court will be required to use a closed-court process for a preliminary hearing. The Law Commission turned their mind to this and they considered that it was acceptable to adopt a closed procedure at this preliminary stage to protect the information until there has been a determination on whether it should be disclosed to the affected party.

During the preliminary hearing, the court will determine if the information is national security information and how it should be protected during their substantive hearing. The affected party will be excluded from the closed preliminary hearing, but they will have their interested represented by, as we’ve discussed, a special advocate. The judge and the special advocate will have full access to all the national security information that is the subject of the application and that is at issue in those proceedings.

Part 3 agreed to.

Part 4 Amendments to other legislation