Law Society attacks Govt

Press, 17 August 1979, Page 5

Law Society attacks Govt

PA Wellington The Government has usurped the role of both the Arbitration Court and Parliament, the New Zea-> land Law Society has said, A vice-president, Mr R. E. Wylie, said the society was concerned about the implications of the Gov-, ernment’s action on the general wage order appli-i cation. Speaking in the absence overseas of the society’s president, Mr Wylie said that the rule of' law, which was the foundation and guarantee of liberty, required respect for the law and for constitutional authority. The Arbitration Court' had fixed the date of hear-: ing for an application for a general wage order, : which had been properly brought before it by a party entitled according to the law as enacted by. Par-: liament. The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) had announced that the Government had decided to repeal the law, Such a repeal was the function of Parliament, not of the Government, said Mr Wylie. In spite of the fact that Parliament was sitting at the time, it had not been consulted. The Prime Minister had then announced a wage increase that would be made by regulation under legist lation that had not even been introduced in Parlia-s ment. The reasons advanced by the Prime Minister as justifying these moves were all reasons which, could have been urged on the court under the existing law when the application was heard. They were all matters which the court was empowered to take into account. Instead, the Government had without legal authority pre-empted the jurisdiction of the court and acted as if Parliament were a mere formality. The danger of this kind of thinking was pointed out

in a recent address by Sir Alexander Turnbull, a former president of the Court of Appeal, said Mr Wylie. “If Parliamentary democracy means anything to New Zealand, we should insist that the Government keep within the law as enacted by Parliament and applied by the courts, and does not pre-empt their decisions,” said Mr Wylie. The Attorney-General (Mr McLay) has defended the Government’s action.

“The Law Society is, quite frankly, wrong in its constitutional argument. If what it says is correct, everything that is said in the Speech from the Throne is illegal because it pre-empts Parliament by anticipating that Parliament will pass the laws that the Government puts before it. “What I announced the week before last about a new court structure would be illegal and unconstitutional because I am anticipating that Parliament will pass the laws that I will put before it.” The society had “forgotten” the sequence of events, Mr McLay said.