OFFENDING CLAUSE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26544, 20 August 1947, Page 6

OFFENDING CLAUSE

POLICE FORCE BILL QUESTION OF POWERS Parliamentary Reporter WELLINGTON, Aug. 19. . Further opposition to the clause in the Police Force Bill which provided that persons in lawful custody could be fingerprinted and photographed at police stations before conviction, but that, in the event of acquittal or dismissal of a charge, the particulars taken were to be destroyed, was expressed by Government and Opposition members in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr J. R. Hanan (Oppn., Invercargill) pointed out that this power meant that persons arrested for drunkenness and other harmless offenders could be fingerprinted and photographed and these details retained if they ..were convicted. He suggested that there should be an amending provision that the power should apply only where the offences involved dishonesty or violence. The clause was retained and the Bill passed. Mr Langstone (Govt-., Roskill) opposed the clause unless it was altered to provide for the taking of particulars before conviction only with the person’s consent. He said that authority could be kind and also very cruel The country possessed a good police force, but it should not be invested with super powers. Sometimes, in the exuberance of duty, an individual might do all sorts of things from whicn the man in the street had the right to be protected. Authority of Magistrate Mr W. S. Goosman (Oppn., Piako) said he could not imagine why a person should be printed and photographed before conviction. This might be all right for persons familiar with the law, but the first experience could be very hard. He was opposed to tne authorising of the printing and photographing of every person arrested. He suggested that where this was necessary provision could be made for the authority of a magistrate’ to be obtained.

The Minister in Charge of Police, Mr Fraser, said that persons arrested and taken to the gaols in custody could be fingerprinted now and the proposed alteration merely made it possible to do the same at police stations. He could rfot imagine an innocent person objecting. Persons suspected of serious offences might be arrested on a light charge, bailed at once, and not fingerprinted, whereas possession of the identification could mean their apprehension for serious crimes. He hoped he would not ever be accused of subscribing to the doctrine of infallibility of the police who were only human beings subject to human frailties and there could be men inside such forces who would abuse their power or think they could bluff or bully. He did not know of any, however, and considered New Zealand fortunate in its officers. Mr G. H. O. Wilson (Govt., Palmerston North) said they wanted to ensure that the powers conferred did not go beyond what were necessary.. When the clause was debated last Friday Mr Oram had wanted to go further than the clause now provided. He had favoured retaining prints and photographs of acquitted persons, and twen suggested that everyone should be fingerprinted. To retain the prints of innocent persons would create a special class of persons not guilty but likely to be thought guilty because their particulars were on record. Where there were records there were files and from then on there would be a downward path, for once files were permitted of innocent persons it would be easy to give permission to keep more records. He was amazed, surprised and shocked to hear such a suggestion made. No Harm in It * The Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr Parry, said that if the clause gave the police greater facilities for doing their duty, he saw no harm in it, but there 'would be harm if power was used to the extent of irritation.. Mr Fraser said the Ponsonby Post Office murder was solved from fingerprints on file in connection with an offence of desertion from the armed forces. He thought it would be rare if inebriates were fingerprinted and photographed but they must trust the police, even if mistakes were made, to use discretion and decency as he was sure was done in 999 cases out of 1000. He was prepared to look into the matter and see that the power was not abused. Mr C. G. E. Harker (Oppn., Hawke’s Bay) said that .fingerprinting would save innocent people and convict the guilty. Mr R. M. McFarlane (Govt., Christchurch Central) said that the police should not be handicapped in the interests of so-called personal liberty. The latter could be carried too far. Mr Fraser: Those in opposition to the clause were out to defeat the police. The clause was approved and the Bill passed.