Te Kahika also knowingly filed false electoral returns, Lee said. And when the time came for him to verify the returns to the Electoral Commission, he was unable to because he had not kept records.
In July 2020, Kelly held a fundraising event in Eden Terrace in Auckland for Te Kahika’s NZ Public Party. Te Kahika spoke to an audience of around 150 people.
At the event, Kelly handed an envelope of $10,000 cash to Te Kahika and said to him “here’s a contribution to your campaign”, the court heard. Later in the evening, Te Kahika told Kelly the money would be spent on campaign billboards.
He later sent Kelly a photograph of himself with the billboards.
Lee said in August 2020 the two men met again at Kelly’s house. The $10,000 donation came up and Kelly asked Te Kahika to provide a receipt. He again said they had been used for billboards and showed an email chain with a billboard company.
Kelly, satisfied the money had been spent as intended, then donated another $5000 in cash to Te Kahika.
Lee said political candidates were required by law to declare donations larger than $1500.
Between February and April 2021, Te Kahika submitted four different returns to the Electoral Commission which contained various information about his donations and expenses. None of the returns disclosed any donations by Kelly.
After noticing the absence of his donation in Te Kahika’s published returns, Kelly raised the issue with the commission.
The commission was already speaking with Te Kahika about his returns at the time. It asked him about Kelly’s donation, and he said it was “koha” because he was not earning an income at the time, Lee said.
After further discussions, the commission referred the matter to police and Te Kahika was charged in September 2021.
In his opening, lawyer Paul Borich KC said Te Kahika’s defence was simple: the money was not given as a candidate donation.
“It was given to him as a personal gift, to help with his whānau - as a koha.”
Kelly was closely connected to Jami-Lee Ross, Borich said. After the 2020 election loss, Ross’ party and Te Kahika’s party got into a dispute.
Kelly got angry after the falling out and attempted to re-characterise the payment, the court heard.
“It was payback,” Borich said. Kelly was upset that Te Kahika was quitting politics and began “re-writing history”.
Addressing the charges of making false returns, Borich said because the payment was not a donation, there was no need to declare it as one.
“In short, the defence here is that Michael Kelly is exacting vengeance - utu if you like.”
The trial is set down for four days.
“100 per cent not true”
Kelly was the first witness called this afternoon.
He told the court his donations to Te Kahika and his party were purely political. He wanted to support Te Kahika and his party because there were the only ones taking a strong stance against vaccine mandates which were in place at the time.
Kelly said after giving him the first donation at the Eden Terrace event, Te Kahika told him that he would spend the money on billboards. Te Kahika texted him five days later with photographs of him with the billboards, which he took to infer that his donation had paid for them.
A video was shown to the court in which Te Kahika told his followers that Kelly gave him the money for his family because he did not have an income; that he never asked for a receipt; and that he did not give him any instructions on how to spend it.
Asked about these claims, Kelly said: “It is 100 per cent not true. I didn’t know the man, I didn’t know his financial situation. I was interested in supporting a political movement, primarily against vaccine mandates which I was concerned about.”
Under cross-examination, Kelly was challenged about some of his central claims.
Borich said when Kelly gave Te Kahika the envelope of cash, he told him: “This is for your whānau.”
Kelly said that was “100 per cent incorrect”. He added he never used the word “whānau”.
Kelly also rejected suggestions from the defence lawyer that he never mentioned billboards that night, that the envelope had nothing written on it, and that he never asked for evidence of how the first $10,000 donation was spent.
The trial continues.
