Bill Of Rights Unlikely To Be Passed This Year

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30213, 19 August 1963, Page 12

Bill Of Rights Unlikely To Be Passed This Year

(From Out Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, August 18. The Bill of Rights, which came before Parliament last week, is unlikely to be enacted this session. Several experts on constitutional law have already indicated that they intend to make substantial submissions to the select committee of Parliament to which the bill has been referred; and the time taken to hear evidence on the bill could alone prevent it proceeding further this year.

Three times since the National Party said in its 1960 election manifesto that, as the Government, it would "pass a Bill of Rights similar to that recently adopted by the Canadian Parliament,” the Speech from the Throne at the beginning of sessions has promised tlie introduction of the bill. But the speech by the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) last week suggested that the Government may be satisfied with having merely presented a bill whose fate will be left to public opinion He asked hat special efforts be made to obtain the opinions of the public and already there are signs that many views will be unfavourable This might well suit the Government, for the bill's enactment would create farreaching difficulties for tlie courts, much expense to citizens who want to test their grievances. confusion tor lawyers, and the compounding of problems for legislators quite out of proportion to the conceivable advantages Alms of Bill It is desirable, says the preamble of the bill, to embody the fundamental human rights and freedoms, derived from the principles upheld by the people of New Zealand. in a bill to manifest the respect of the people and Parliament for these rights and freedoms.

The principles on which the bill is founded are: "The

acknowledgement of the supremacy of God. the dignity and the worth of the human person, whatever his racial origins may be, and the place of the family m a society of tree men and free institutions . . that all its citizens of whatever race are one people . (that) men and institutions remain tree only when freedom is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values, the rights and freedoms of others, the general welfare, and the rule of law ” If the bill becomes an Act of Parliament, it will not bear the usual short title >f an “act.” but it will be called the "New Zealand Bill of Rights. 1963." Hie bill recognises six kinds of freedom to exist without discrimination by race, national origin, colour religious, opinion, belief cr sex. They are: (1) The right of the individual to life, liberty, and security of the person, and the right not to be deprived of these except in accordance with law (2) The right of the individual to equality before the law and to the protection of the law. (3) The right of tlie individual to own property and the right not to be deprived of it except in accordance with the law. (4) Freedom of thought, conscience and religion. (5) Freedom of speech and expression. ' (6) Freedom of peaceful assembly and association. Rights and Duties The bill declares that everj person has duties to others and, in exercising his rights and freedoms, is limited by the laws to protect the rights and freedorps of others or laws in the general welfare or security of the country It provides that these rights are not only subject to this qualification, but to the requirements of die Acts Interpretation Act that every Act of Parliament must be given a fair and large interpretation to best ensure the

attainment of its objects in accordance with its meaning, intent and spirit. But the bill reinforces that act by requiring that every enactment shall be interpreted and applied so as not to infringe or abridge the six freedoms. To these it adds a further eight particular restraints upon the interpretation and application of the law. These are to prevent: (1) Arbitrary detention, imprisonment or exile. <2> The imposition of cruel or unusual treatment or punishment. (3) The deprivation of an arrested or detained person's right to be informed promptly of the act or omission for which he is detained (unless it is impracticable to do so. or unless the reason >s obvious in the circumstance.-) or his right to retain a barrister or solicitor without delay . . or his right to apply for a writ of habeas corpus for the determination of the validity of his detention and to be released if it is not lawful. (4> The deprivation of a person’s right to a fair hearing in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice to determine his rights and obligations before an authority. (5) The loss of the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to the law in a fair and public hearing. (6) The loss of the right of any person charged with an offence to reasonable bail, except for a just cause. (7) The conviction of a person for an offence except for a breach of the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. (8> The imposition of a penalty on a convicted person which is heavier than that permitted by the law at the time of the offence. The bill ends with a saving clause that nothing in the bill shall limit or affect any right which may now exist but which is not specified in the bill.