Help PMA grow | Petition forms | Site map | PMA main page
Further : Te Kaha to Gulf
1 September 1999
Further exchange of letters re the legality of the deployment of Te Kaha to the Gulf on the point of whether or not it breaches the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987.
18 August 1999
Mr John Urlich
Peace Council of Aotearoa
30 August 1999
Sir Douglas Graham MP
Dear Sir Douglas,
Legal position -Navy Frigate Te Kaha for Duty in the Gulf - Information sought under the Freedom of Information Act
Thank you for letter of explanation (18August) in response to our letter of the 27 July concerning Section 15 of the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act which prevents the public from taking legal action against the Crown. We would like to make the following comments.
1. The suggestion that the Attorney General acts independently is essentially theoretical rather than real, due to the fact that the Attorney General is appointed by the ruling political party. Consequently, the Attorney General has a conflict of interest; he/she will be disinclined to take an opposing view to that of his/her colleagues. Further, it is more likely the Attorney General has opinions that are politically orientated.
2. English Law proclaims that no man shall be a judge in his own cause. This maxim is violated under s15 of the Nuclear Free Act. As noted in our previous letter the power given to the Attorney General under Section 15 makes him/her a one-person constitutional court.
3. Any government bent on weakening the effect of this legislation would not want to see the removal of s15, which runs contrary to the rule of law. Moreover, in a democracy, such a policy is unacceptable as it denies due process and ministerial accountability, as the Minister is accountable only to him or her self.
4. You make reference to special public interest factors that have to be taken into account by the Attorney General. However, nowhere the Act is there a definition or meaning of what is a "special public interest." The only possibility where circumstance may suggest the need for special public interest is if NZ were in a state of war and martial law imposed, but the Act makes no reference to such an event. Notwithstanding, s15 is capable of being used to rejoin nuclear Military alliances as some Ministers have strongly advocated contrary to the spirit and letter of the Act.
The Peace Council opposed the inclusion of s15 before the legislation was passed. We trust therefore that in view of the forgoing arguments you will review this section of the Act before leaving office.
John Urlich, President
PEACE COUNCIL OF AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED.
CC Members of Select Committee of MFAT and others
Return to main page on military spending and military alliances