Trio faces $1.2m bill for spy base sabotage

Sam Land and two others may have to pay $1.2 million after damaging a spy base.

Three protesters, including a Northland farmer, who sabotaged a radar dome at the Waihopai spy base could have to pay $1.2 million in damages after their appeal against liability was dismissed.

The Crown had sought to recover damages from Dominican friar Peter Murnane, teacher Adrian Leason and farmer Sam Land after they were convicted over the attack on the GCSB spy base near Blenheim in April 2008.

The men cut through alarmed electric fences and slashed one of the two inflatable domes that cover the satellite dishes, causing the dome to deflate.

A jury acquitted the men of burglary and wilful damage, but the High Court ruled the men were still liable for $1,229,289 in damages.

The trio appealed against that decision in the Court of Appeal in May, arguing they were not liable for damages because the GCSB's property was being used for illegal espionage which was not in New Zealand's national interests.

The argument relied on a seldom-used legal principle known as 'ex turpi causa', which holds that a party cannot bring a claim if they have acted unlawfully.

They also argued their actions were protected because they were intended to protect others - an argument based on the claim that the intelligence processed at the Waihopai facility had been used by US and British forces to direct attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on both grounds, leaving it open for the Crown to seek damages.

In their judgment, Justices Tony Randerson, Lynton Stevens and Douglas White also ordered the men to pay costs in relation to the appeal hearing.

The court rejected the 'defence of another' argument, noting the appellants had no way of knowing whether an immediate risk to others existed, and had no way of knowing if their actions in damaging the radome would prevent that supposed peril.

The appellants were also unable to show their actions were proportionate to the damage they caused.

The court also rejected the 'ex turpi causa' argument, noting that case law strongly supported that the defence was not available in the circumstances of the case.

Speaking outside court in May, Mr Murnane said the men would not pay damages if the appeal was unsuccessful.

"We have no intention of paying a cent, even if I had it, because I don't believe it's a just case."