Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull aka Posie Parker had liquid, believed to be soup, thrown at her as she attempted to make her way to the rotunda at Albert Park, Auckland on March 25, 2023 Photo / Dean Purcell
Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull aka Posie Parker had liquid, believed to be soup, thrown at her as she attempted to make her way to the rotunda at Albert Park, Auckland on March 25, 2023 Photo / Dean Purcell
Police Minister Mark Mitchell says protests outside private residences are a “step too far” and the Government is “very willing” to explore recommendations to create a new offence to address it.
It comes as the Independent Police Conduct Authority calls for new legislation creating a regime for how policedeal with protests.
The current framework relating to the handling of protests was “inadequate and not fit for purpose,” authority chairman Judge Kenneth Johnston KC said in a report released today.
“It leaves frontline police officers and their supervisors to determine what constitutes reasonable restrictions on protesters’ rights, with only general and high-level guidance in statute and case law. This creates a large measure of uncertainty as to the limits of lawful protest, and substantial inconsistency in police practice.”
The findings stem from a review undertaken by the IPCA following complaints about the handling of a protest at Auckland’s Albert Park in March 2023 in support of anti-transgender rights campaigner Posie Parker. The review was also informed by complaints about police handling of protests relating to Israel and Gaza.
British activist Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull aka Posie Parker is escorted from Albert Park. Photo / Dean Purcell
The IPCA said that unlike other jurisdictions that New Zealand often compares itself to, there is no legislation here setting out a process for determining in advice what restrictions can be placed on freedoms of assembly, movement or expression.
Most local authorities have bylaws that require advance notification of a protest in a public place, but the IPCA said these were rarely enforced and their “broad scope often rendered them inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act or otherwise invalid”.
The IPCA found internal changes could help, such as improvements to training and more detailed guidance for officers needing to balance public safety and people’s right to protest.
However, these would be “insufficient to address the problem”, the IPCA said.
It therefore recommended police propose new legislation which “contains both a set of over-arching principles relating to an actual or anticipated protest (or other assembly) that might justify limitations on fundamental rights such as the freedoms of expression, assembly and movement, and specific powers in relation to how such events may be managed and controlled”.
The IPCA said the legislation should:
create a new regulatory regime for advance notification by organisers of designated types of assemblies (including protests);
allow senior police officers, in consultation with local authorities (and, in relation to a state highway, NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi), to set conditions in advance as to the way in which a protest must be conducted with which participants must comply;
specify that either (a) notification and the conducting of a protest substantially in accordance with the terms of the notification would protect participants from criminal and civil liability; or (b) a failure to notify would constitute a criminal offence;
govern when a traffic management plan is required, and specify who should be responsible for it;
contain a new, fit-for-purpose offence provision, which would replace certain current criminal offences in the public assembly area; and
create a specific offence relating to the picketing of private residences.
“The authority’s proposals are not intended to impose greater general constraints on the right to protest”, Judge Johnston said. “This right is fundamental to a democracy and protected by the Bill of Rights Act.”
“Our proposals are designed to provide greater protection for protesters by creating a process for decisions to be made in advance about how to preserve and facilitate the rights of freedom of assembly, movement and expression on the one hand and provide reasonable constraints for the protection of public safety and order on the other.”
Police Minister Mark Mitchell is opening to exploring a new offence. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Mitchell, responding to the report’s findings, said he and his ministerial colleagues would assess whether any existing legislation could satisfy the authority’s recommendations.
“If there isn’t then of course we’re very open to it.”
He wouldn’t be drawn on his view on the proposed offence for protests outside private residences but acknowledged police had taken action on such protests and described them as a “step too far”.
“It disrupts not just the person that’s been protested, but the neighbours in the neighbourhood as a whole, so very willing to have a look at that.”
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith accepted there had been an “increased amount” of such protests and said the proposed offence would be considered alongside the other recommendations.
However, he was cautious when asked when the Government would make decisions on whether to pursue new legislation.
“I’m just conscious of the fact that we’ve got a very busy justice agenda as you well know, and as soon as we can get on to something in that area, we will.”
Jamie Ensor is a political reporter in the NZ Herald Press Gallery team based at Parliament. He was previously a TV reporter and digital producer in the Newshub Press Gallery office.
