The secret Secret-Court of New Zealand
Anyone who has followed this site will know that New Zealand has a secret court – the Family Court. It is secret in two respects that are abhorrent to justice, firstly, its selective publishing of decisions, and secondly, its restriction on media coverage which extends to judges threatening editors; all in the name of the privacy of the individuals that use its services, not the crooks that run it, of course.
There have been many reports about and protests to the irregularities and lack of due process in this court, recorded on this site.
But, what does a court do that doesn’t want some of its goings-on recorded at all?
It becomes even more secret?
In an attempt to remove child support from the courts jurisdiction and make it a matter of compliance, part of the Family Court became (not just secret in the measures described above) actually secret.
The purpose of this action is to make child support unchallengeable, a non legal issue, a matter of negotiation with the State.
There have been some ugly occurrences associated with this. Lawyers have been threatened to ensure child support cases are not taken to court, and this will continue to happen. This is a billion dollar industry.
A few years ago, and this was reported in the media, a special child support unit was established in an attempt to clear the child support debt. To achieve this it required some rather draconian powers. The ability to operate in another jurisdiction, namely Australia was one such step. Within a very short time the suicide of a New Zealand father living in Australia (link) was reported back here in New Zealand.
Paul Anthony Jenkins, is representative of thousands of men who will die, not courtesy of the tax-man, but executed by a legal system controlled by judges.
And try as you may, you won’t get diddly-squat from any Australian department about the treatment of New Zealand citizens within their jurisdiction.
Fathers living in New Zealand have been equally stunned by the seemingly unrestricted processes, but this is not without the force of the law, just without public record.
This unit in association with the Secret Division of the Family Court is the means by which the process is ‘legally’ undertaken. Its theoretical operation is based on the premise that the child support defaulter is unable to be served papers, and therefore none go any further than the judge. The papers are never placed in the Justice Department and you are not able to retrieve them even if you make a request through the appropriate channels or to the Justice Minister. Neither are you allowed to know the name of the judge who signed any of the warrants for interception of communications, seizure of goods, etc. or are you allowed to challenge these decisions in any other court. You’d be a fool to enter the Family Court.
Warrants to arrest don’t actually exist. The police system is accessed to flag the existence of a warrant. If you’re unlucky enough to get caught by chance, you’ll end up in court by default. Police are very cagey about executing these warrants (signed by ‘a judge’) and they will try to get you to believe that the warrant exists and enter a voluntary process.
If you are in this position, ask for evidence of the existence of the papers upon which the warrant is based from the Justice Department and the warrant will evaporate. The system relies entirely on your naïve belief.
As discussed in the previous post (link), this also impacts the WINZ benefit system. While there is a safety-net in place to prioritise and allocate benefit deductions but not crucify jobseekers or sickness beneficiaries, this secret court issues assignments of benefits to the IRD, which is outside of the normal deduction regime and can leave WINZ customers with varying percentages of their benefit, below the normal minimum amount.
This is fine as long as the affected person is depressed and likely to commit suicide, however some will become aggravated and could even form murderous intent. To front line WINZ staff, they know, no difference, these are simply child support deductions, and the difficult cases are dealt with by managers who are a little more informed. Of course there’s always the possibility that some incensed individual will walk into WINZ with a shotgun and blow a few women away, and the manager who can’t discuss her job with friends or relatives will commit suicide.
That would just be acceptable collateral damage to the above process, and the back story would never be told in the murder trial.
Why, you ask, would a court go to this extent, and risk its credibility. The answer to that is quite simple (apart from the hope they’ll never be held to account) as many of the people being pursued for child support had these debts created virtue of the above secret process we talked about at the beginning of this post.
Imagine a legal process that had to confront its own illegal processes.
Better to pretend it’s all legit and above board and go kill a few people that were victim and witness to their processes.
It’s the disgusting pompous arrogance of a few entitled people who regard the average New Zealander as legally-illiterate panicked-sheep running into fences.
You don’t need to understand some bullshit legal system to know the difference between right and wrong, something that has eluded the current Justice Minister and her predecessor.
While the media cannot or will not report this corruption, those affected should not be intimidated and silenced. You take no greater risk than our young forebears who lay buried in their thousands on the Gallipoli Peninsula in the name of freedom from oppression.
Current and previous Justice Minister are females so system won’t improve anytime soon. Furthermore Key & English are revenue gatherers hence the IRD CGA, Speed Cameras, etc in their arsenal. National could care less about poverty, claims it doesn’t exist whilst their policies drive more kiwis into that condition.
Comment by JONO — Sat 16th January 2016 @ 9:24 am
This has been going on for decades, though without ‘legitimate’ authority. I went through the ‘Liable Parent Contribution’ scheme which was ‘technically fair’, but implemented in draconian and abhorrent ways. Through periods of depression and unemployment I actually ended up owing more in penalties than Child Support. This while I was supposed to be paying $50 per week out of an unemployment/sickness benefit of about $75! Decisions almost invariably went against the father, whether it be custody, access or reduction of liability due to access costs. At 9 years old the court gave my ex permission (against my objections) to take my son to the UK for 6 months, have a guess when he came back. I’ll give you a hint, I’m still waiting 25 years later.
The silver lining is that this stuff is now out in the open. The hubris and arrogance will lead to more and more people fighting back against the most corrupt branch of government I have ever known to exist.
We can’t just concentrate on Child Support (more aptly and honestly coined ‘Father Tax’)though. The issue would not exist if shared custody was the default, and male reproductive rights (e.g. the male pill)were respected. The good news is that more mothers, sisters, daughters are seeing what is happening to the men they love and care for. Maybe the government will listen to them, it obviously doesn’t care about men and fathers.
Comment by bjrodger — Sun 17th January 2016 @ 10:17 am
Totally agree with you bjrodger and you have my sympathy. Back in the 80s the “child support” legislation was 100% anti-male and that hasn’t improved since. At the same time the “Guardianship Act” had ony ONE clause that dealt with custodial parents (mostly femmes) interfering with access orders or denying father’s access. Fortunately I was free of the “maintenance” hassle before the ‘Liable Parent Contribution’ scheme came into being and both my daughters left home at 16 never to return to a mother they both loathe. Ironically 20 years later that mother who spent years thwarting access orders and trying to turn my kids against me was taking both daughters to Court fighting for access to her grandchildren. Sometimes what goes around comes around. Today’s draconian anti-male child support systems cause problems worldwide that politicians haven’t a clue how to resolve.
Comment by JONO — Sun 17th January 2016 @ 2:12 pm
Hi all,
I looked to find a post about ‘Restraining Orders/Applications’ but didn’t find one suitable so I am sharing my news here and hope you don’t mind.
I want to share something that may assist others.
………..
I received a Restraining Order/Application on Thursday 7th January, 2016 and after reading the court paperwork (other than affidavit, etc), I saw I had to apply for a ‘Notice of Defense’ with 5 WORKING DAYS prior to the court date which was today.
Because there were 2 weekends between receiving the application from the baliff and the court date, I had 24 hours to seek legal advice and have my ‘Notice of Defense’ sworn, witnessed and presented to the court.
WHAT DID I DO?
I reached out to a men’s advocate and my choice was Allan Harvey of Union of Fathers.
I was soooo fortunate that the assistance was available and for a donation rather than $350 plus an hour lawyer fees.
I wrote my affidavit —– yes, my side of the story —— there’s always 2 sides, lol.
And I sent my affidavit to Allan who changed everything around, imo.
I didn’t want to listen to Allan for I was in the right, I had a grievance, the other woman was fortunate my actions weren’t worse.
BUT THEN….
I decided to write my side without attacking AND what Allan suggested.
END RESULT
Allan was 100% correct in everything he said.
The judge was not interested in anything more than me saying, “I won’t have anything to do with her. I won’t, I won’t, I won’t”.
And just like Allan said, the judge threw it out when the other woman didn’t want to accept my offer.
THANK YOU SOOO, VERY MUCH ALLAN. You’ve saved me and I am grateful to give a donation.
………
My advice is: If you need assistance and you want to save mega $$$$, contact a men’s group.
Comment by julie — Mon 18th January 2016 @ 12:25 pm
Hi ALL (again),
I thought I would share the wording for an adjournment for I couldn’t find the template to file for an adjournment on the ‘Family Court’ website and the court registrar couldn;t give me one either.
You apply for ‘INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION ON NOTICE FOR ADJOURNMENT OF PROCEEDINGS'(cover page)
Document notifies the Registrar of the District Court and the ‘Applicant’ that –
1) The application is made on reliance on rule 7.35 of the District Rules 2014 (page 2)
Comment by julie — Tue 19th January 2016 @ 1:30 am
We’re developing a State of insidious little bastards that choose to hold people prisoner to things they cannot change.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 19th January 2016 @ 8:43 am
complain to your MP they say.. the MP says raise it with the Ombudsman.. Do that.. and it goes nowhere. Only response was to say it’s been received.
Comment by noname — Tue 19th January 2016 @ 2:32 pm
Don’t expect anything from the Ombudsman’s Office, now that it’s been infected with the foul stench of Boshier.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 19th January 2016 @ 2:34 pm
I was surprised way back in the early 90’s when I got caught up in the child support drift net. Then I was surprised and needed answers. Some years later due to the fate of failed policies I found answers. The professions and bureaucracies are regulated to live off of failure through the process of unaccountability. No one has to get it right except the victim. Then through universal collusion the odds are stacked against any social requirement to any law enforcement. One universal rule of corruption seems unbroken – all get paid except the victim.
Comment by Geoff Mctague — Sun 29th May 2016 @ 9:24 pm