The Maori Party continues to opposes GCSB Bill
The Maori Party continues to oppose the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) and Related Legislation
Amendment Bill because it is clearly intrusive and lacks justification for what we believe is an extraordinary extension
of powers of the GCSB.
“The GCSB Bill is inconsistent with the rights to freedom of expression and freedom from unreasonable search or seizure
under New Zealand law and will merely validate actions like those of the NZ Police during the raid on Mr Kim Dotcom’s
property, which have now been deemed unjust,” says Maori Party co-leader Te Ururoa Flavell.
“We also opposed the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Act 2007 which was passed post Operation 8 to justify and validate
the actions of the police during Operation 8 that took place under a Labour Government. We are vehemently opposed to
laws that are passed retrospectively.”
“Last month an Independent Police Conduct Authority report on Operation 8 found in some areas police acted ‘unlawfully,
unjustifiably and unreasonably’ during those raids. This GCSB bill will effectively justify those police actions.”
“The current surveillance regimes have already been used to intervene in the lives of some New Zealanders in an invasive
and intrusive way which has not always been warranted. The fact is that here in New Zealand we already have surveillance
laws allowing the NZSIS and the Police to track our citizens. The Government does not need any more power to survey its
citizens. Earlier this year the Kitteridge Report revealed that 88 New Zealand citizens may have been subjected to
surveillance by the GCSB. In the interests of transparency the Maori Party requested that these names be revealed
however this request was declined,” says Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia.
“There will be many groups that will be unfairly targeted by this new law including those objecting to economic activity
or protesting against government laws and legislation. Freedom of association and freedom of speech are fundamentals of
any democratic society. This proposed law threatens these basic human rights, lacks transparency and gives unnecessary
power to only a few people.”