Napier man Major Keelan (pictured) and Turei Cooper are challenging the validity of a council bylaw by claiming that it breaches their freedom of expression. Photo/Duncan Brown
Napier man Major Keelan (pictured) and Turei Cooper are challenging the validity of a council bylaw by claiming that it breaches their freedom of expression. Photo/Duncan Brown
Several beggars who frequent the Napier central business district are challenging a council bylaw that forbids begging by claiming it "to be in breach of the constitutional right to freedom of expression".
Turei Mahia Cooper, 32, and Major Keelan, 47, have both pleaded not guilty to charges relating to breachinga Napier City Council bylaw by "soliciting for money without authority", otherwise known as begging.
Represented by Public Defence Service lawyer Alan Cressey, Cooper and Keelan made a successful application for a judge-alone trial in which it will be argued that denying a person the right to ask others for help is "the most fundamental breach of freedom of expression possible".
"Furthermore, that begging is a form of political expression that lies at the very core of freedom of expression in that it draws attention to the defendants' plight, thus raising social and political consciousness amongst the public."
In a memorandum to the Napier District Court, Mr Cressey noted the validity of similar bylaws overseas had been challenged and found to be "in breach of the constitutional right to freedom of expression, and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which those countries were signatories".
"It will be submitted, as it has already been in overseas jurisdictions, that to deny a person the right to ask others for help is the most fundamental breach of freedom of expression possible."
Mr Cressey cited section 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, saying "all New Zealanders had a guaranteed right to freedom of expression guaranteed to them and that, when applied to begging, the bylaw also violated freedom of thought, conscience and religion".
The charges were originally set to be heard before a justice of the peace after the pair appeared in court earlier this year, but Mr Cressey's successful application means their next appearance will be before a district court judge.
Mr Cressey had requested the case to be allocated a judge-alone trial given the nature of the defendants' challenge; citing that it involved "matters of utmost public interest and importance".
