"It's time for NZ Judges to be held accountable to the LAW - starting with Chief High Court Judge Winkelmann.

PROTEST FOR NZ JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY!!
Thursday 15 November 2012, will be a protest outside the Supreme Court in Wellington,
(85 Lambton Quay) from 9am - 10am and 1pm - 2pm.
Vince Siemer is facing 6 wks jail ! FOR WHAT??

14 November 2012

PRESS RELEASE: 'Anti-corruption campaigner' Penny Bright

"It's time for NZ Judges to be held accountable to the LAW - starting with Chief High Court Judge Winkelmann.

Unbelievably, in New Zealand, 'perceived' to be 'the least corrupt country in the world', (according to Transparency International's 2011 Corruption Perception Index http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2011/results/ ) our Judges are effectively 'out of control', and operate in ways that are neither transparent, nor accountable", says 'anti-corruption campaigner' Penny Bright.

"There is no enforceable 'Code of Conduct' for NZ Judges; no 'Register of Pecuniary Interests' for NZ Judges and Court proceedings are often not recorded. How can a 'court of record' - not keep a record? How can 'justice be done and be seen to be done' - when there is no record in Court of WHAT was done?"

Tomorrow, Thursday 15 November 2012, will be a protest outside the Supreme Court in Wellington, from 9am - 10am and 1pm - 2pm.
(85 Lambton Quay) http://www.wellingtonnz.com/school_trips/supreme_court_and_old_high_court_building#TB_window

Here, an unprecedented and historic Court case is being held.

For the first time in the history of the world - a 'third party' publisher is facing six weeks jail for 'contempt of Court' for publishing a
suppressed judicial decision.

This third party' publisher, is arguably NZ's foremost judicial 'Public Watchdog / 'whistle-blower' Vince Siemer, who exposes the lack of judicial transparency and accountability through his website - www.kiwisfirst.co.nz

Vince Siemer is facing six weeks jail for 'contempt of court' for publishing Chief High Court Judge Helen Winkelmann's decision, that the Urewera defendants were not entitled to trial by jury - a decision which she then suppressed - so that the public were not allowed to know.

"On what lawful basis can a NZ Judge suppress a decision or the reasons for that decision?" asks Ms Bright.

"This is the basis of the Appeal which will be heard in the NZ Supreme Court, Thursday 15 November 2012. (SC 37 - 2012). "

Vince Siemer is being defended by prominent human rights lawyer Tony Ellis.
_____________________________________________________________________________

In a New Zealand Herald article by David Fisher, dated 27 October 2012 - "Judges respond to critics" - Chief High Court Judge, Justice Helen Winkelmann had this to say:
"The requirements that judges work in public and that they provide reasons for their decisions provides the best means of accountability. Their decisions can be, and are, the subject of public comment and criticism. Their decisions can be reviewed or appealed. These are the primary means by which judges are held accountable for their decisions."

Judges, she says, "are not subject to personal direction; not from politicians, the Ministry or the public, and nor from other judges, such as the head of bench". It leaves "judges ... able to decide a case according to law, free from improper pressure or influence".

.................................

Justice Winkelmann warns against any public impulse to make judges' decisions more "consistent" against a set of predetermined guidelines.

"Predictability is achieved through the application of the law. It is not possible or appropriate to measure predictability beyond that.

"If judges do make mistakes these can be corrected on appeal. That is a safeguard against error."

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10843198

"Spot the glaring hypocrisy!" says Ms Bright.

"Can a Judge 'just make it up' and make a Court Order, which is not itself based upon the 'Rule of Law,' for the suppression of a Judgment?

We shall see................"

Signatures will also be collected for the following petition - which :

"Respectfully requests:

That the House urgently legislate to adopt an enforceable Code of Conduct for the New Zealand Judiciary based upon the 'Bangalore Principles for Judicial Conduct' which are intended to establish standards for the ethical conduct of judges, and include the following underpinning judicial values and principles: independence; impartiality; integrity; propriety; equality; competency and diligence."

(The 'Bangalore Principles for Judicial Conduct', are a 'Code of Conduct' made by Judges - for Judges, and are effectively a 'best practice' model that could be used here in New Zealand. http://www.ajs.org/ethics/pdfs/Bangalore_principles.pdf )

Penny Bright
'Anti-corruption campaigner'

Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127

http://www.dodgyjohnhasgone.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/PETITION-Code-of-Conduct-for-NZ-Judges-.pdf

Comments

Commenting has now closed on this article.

The Indymedia Network

Global
Oceania
Latin America
Europe
Africa
Canada
United States
East Asia
South Asia
West Asia