Labour Government Wavered Over Abolition of Privy Council
LawFuel - The Law Jobs and News Wire
**
*LawFuel.co.nz* - Former Attorney-General Margaret Wilson has revealed the previous Labour-led Government reconsidered
its plans to proceed with abolition of appeals to the Privy Council in the wake of the outcry generated by the proposal.
She also disclosed in an address in Hamilton, that concerns the whole Labour-led Government would be endangered,
resulted in the appointment of a group of ministers to assist her with plans to abolish New Zealand appeals to the Privy
Council.
Ms Wilson, who is now a Professor of Law and Public Policy at the University of Waikato, served as Attorney-General and
Associate Minister of Justice for part of the term of the last Labour-led Government.
On September 9 this year Professor Wilson delivered the Harkness Henry lecture in Hamilton, in a speech entitled, From
Privy Council to Supreme Court: A Rite of Passage for New Zealand’s Legal System. Professor Wilson said that there had
been two previous attempts to abolish appeals to the Privy Council.
In 1987, the then-Attorney-General, Geoffrey Palmer, had announced that the Government intended to proceed with
abolition in 1990, to coincide with the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. However, Professor
Wilson said this attempt had been unsuccessful, in part because then-Justice Minister Bill Jeffries opposed abolition.
She said that the National Government in 1996 had introduced to Parliament a bill providing for abolition of the appeals
but a general election had intervened before the bill could be progressed.
Following the election, National had entered into a coalition with New Zealand First, which opposed abolition and the
issue was dropped.
Professor Wilson said the Labour-led Government which took office in 1999 had been elected on a manifesto of abolishing
appeals to the Privy Council. In her roles as Attorney-General and Associate Minister of Justice, she was responsible
for this policy area.
“I was aware of the previous failed attempts and therefore knew the issue had to be managed carefully. I was also aware
that the issue was one for elites within the legal and business communities. It was also an issue for Maori because of
its potential to provide leverage for their agenda of a Maori legal system. The general public had little or no interest
in the question because the relevance to their lives was remote.”
Professor Wilson said there was division within the legal profession over the issue of abolition, with most
practitioners “interested but not passionate” about the matter.
“There were, however, small legal elites who were passionate, well-resourced and articulate. They were also divided.
Some admitted they liked the trips to London and the challenge of appearing before the Privy Council.
“It was good on a CV. Some who made the trip found a court out of touch with the reality of the legal issues facing New
Zealand and irritated with the lack of knowledge and understanding of the local legal context.”
>From a political point of view, Professor Wilson said the legal community was a powerful lobby when advocating its
own interests.
“Their arguments were also mainly focused on the effect on the legal system and had been well rehearsed over a period of
20 years, namely – damage to the rule of law, especially the common law, and the lack of quality, independent, New
Zealand judges.
ends