A public referendum on replacing the Privy Council with a New Zealand Supreme Court is unnecessary, former chief justice Sir Thomas Eichelbaum said today.
Sir Thomas was appearing before Parliament's justice and electoral committee, which is considering the Government proposal.
The Government has received some heated opposition to its proposals, with oppositionparties calling for a referendum on it.
They are concerned not only with the concept of a Supreme Court but also fear judges sympathetic to the Government's views will be appointed.
But Sir Thomas, who favours a New Zealand court, said a referendum was not needed.
"A referendum would, I think, continue and extend a debate which I believe has been damaging to the New Zealand judiciary," he said.
"A lot of things have been said about the ability of New Zealand to mount this court, I think without justification, which reflect unjustly on our judiciary and which lessen confidence in it."
The debate had constantly come back to reasons why New Zealand judges could not be trusted with final issues when they made most of the final decision already, and had been doing so for many years.
"Furthermore, I think a referendum runs the risk that there would be a disparity of resources poured into the debate and that those in favour of retention would be heard rather more than those who are in favour of abolition," Sir Thomas said.
"A lot of things would be said which would be without foundation and which would be difficult to refute, if only for the reason that the judiciary is traditionally reticent in defending itself."
