MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

State of Injustice.

Filed under: General,Law & Courts — Downunder @ 10:27 pm Sun 23rd April 2006

I found this on Teletex.

A real slap in the face for the New Zealand Justice system has been dished out by the Australian Federal court when it overturned extradition warrants for two ex pats who had been sought on charges of historic sexual allegations.

The reasons for the decision — there are fundamental differences in the New Zealand justice system which meant these men wouldn’t get a fair trial.

So the world is watching after all!


  1. Source;

    Aussie judge says NZ courts ‘unfair’,2106,3646151a10,00.html

    An Australian judge’s refusal to send two New Zealand clergymen home to face child-sex charges has been condemned by lawyers and sex-abuse campaigners.

    NZ Law and Social Policy is tarnised far beyond OZY – Open your eyes Kiwi’s.

    Much of the world is riseing against the “Empire of Injustice”. Many are streets ahead of us Sheep-ills.

    Look beyond our shores for the way ahead instead of wasting your time on intrigue and intellectal sabre wobbling, churning over debate thats been had here for 30+ years.

    No insult to the newcomers but the fact is much of what we Kiwis debate/act has been done since before the second world war with little effect

    Jim –

    Comment by JimBWarrior - HandsOnEqualParent — Mon 24th April 2006 @ 8:05 am

  2. Further report from Teletex, An appeal is considered by Police, although this is ambiguous as it didn’t say whether it was NZ or Australian Police appealing. What I found interesting about the stuff article (thanks Jim) was this,

    The Australian Judge – Justice Rodney Madgwick ruled that aspects of the New Zealand judicial system and the length of time since the allegations would make it difficult for the men to receive a fair trial.

    The New Zealand Lawyer said – It may be that there is some specific provision in Australian legislation.

    You cannot defend differences in the judicial system by saying there are differences in the law. If I was to read between the lines here I would say the differences alluded to by the Australian Judge suggested that our judicial system was delivering political outcomes rather than sound legal judgements.

    That is a situation of real concern. If a legal mind from a similar but larger legal system, can spot holes in our judiciary, the taxpayer should be grateful for the contribution – This is the sort of stuff compensation claims are made of, and large ones too.

    Comment by Bevan Berg — Mon 24th April 2006 @ 9:58 am

  3. That’s right Bevan.
    In both Oz and NZ rape is illegal, so it’s not there are differences in the law. It can only mean there are differences in the processes by which the law is adjudicated. The Peter Ellis case shows there are many doubts about the processes by which adjudication is made on even supposed recent incidents of child sexual abuse let alone on those alleged to have happened decades ago. That there’s no statute of limitations in NZ on the time since a crime is alleged to have happened seems harsh IMO.

    Comment by Stephen — Tue 25th April 2006 @ 3:02 am

  4. Let’s hope the Aussies stick to their principles and if the appeal looks like failing maybe we will investigate a statute of limitations to save face.

    Comment by Bevan Berg — Tue 25th April 2006 @ 11:53 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar