Law reforms retain status quo

By HELEN TUNNAH deputy political editor

Sweeping reforms to Britain's judicial system are expected to have little impact on the London-based Privy Council at the centre of contentious New Zealand Government plans for a court shake-up here.

Labour wants to end New Zealanders' right to appeal to the Privy Council by introducing a new domestic court, and British Prime Minister Tony Blair has also announced a radical shake-up of Britain's court system.

Mr Blair is to create a new Supreme Court as the highest court in Britain and abolish the 1400-year-old post of Lord Chancellor.

The intent of the changes is to remove political influence from the appointment of judges, the Lord Chancellor holding potentially conflicting roles as a Cabinet minister, Speaker of the House of Lords and recommending on the appointment of judges.

The changes coincide with Attorney-General Margaret Wilson's proposal to scrap appeal rights to the Privy Council and introduce a Supreme Court comprising local judges.

Margaret Wilson has been in London, attending a Commonwealth conference on the Privy Council, but the Herald has been told the British changes would have little impact on New Zealand.

Victoria University's Dean of Law, Professor Matthew Palmer, said the changes seemed designed to fix an anomaly whereby a political figure could influence the appointment of judges.

"I don't think it has any implications for the Privy Council."

The Privy Council includes the Lord Chancellor and past Lord Chancellors, some Law Lords from the House of Lords and other senior judicial figures from overseas.

Details of the changes have yet to be issued, but it is expected the Law Lords will become judges of Mr Blair's proposed Supreme Court.

That should not rule them out of sitting on the Privy Council, which hears mainly overseas appeals and whose powers might be widened by Mr Blair to more domestic matters.

Labour MP Tim Barnett, chairman of Parliament's justice and electoral select committee which is hearing submissions on the Supreme Court Bill, said Mr Blair's changes were interesting, but he did not think appeals to the Privy Council would be affected.

Acting Attorney-General Pete Hodgson declined to comment.

Act justice spokesman Stephen Franks, whose party strongly opposes Labour's planned changes here, said there was nothing in Britain's actions that threatened Privy Council appeals. He said there was no reason House of Lords judges could not sit on the Privy Council if they were simply renamed British Supreme Court judges.

Mr Barnett said recently that interest in the Supreme Court Bill was so high that extra public submissions would be received and MPs would consult more widely on the bill, particularly with Maori.