Editorial: Confidence in our law put to test

Opinion

When police in other countries foil plans of apparent terrorism, they usually act quietly and invariably they quickly give the public a reasonable account of what they have discovered. The New Zealand police this week have done neither.

Their swoop on a suspicious camp in the Ureweras and the homes of activists in several causes was carried out so conspicuously that news cameras were able to catch some of it. But when it came to explaining the raids, Police Commissioner Howard Broad was circumspect in the extreme. Over ensuing days, when the arrested were brought to court, judges too have closed the door.

Consequently the country is still in the dark at the end of a week in which its confidence in its internal security, and in its police and law, has been put to a test. Many people take the view that the police would not carry out an operation of this kind under anti-terrorism law without very good evidence that a terrorist act was imminent. Many others suspect the police have massively overreacted to activity they may have misread.

The latter view finds comfort in the fact that charges laid against 18 people so far have been brought under the Arms Act, not the Terrorism Suppression Act. The firearms charges arose from a seizure of weapons that includes military style semi-automatic rifles and Molotov cocktails. Police say more serious charges are being considered.

All but two of those charged have had their names suppressed and media have been shut out of hearings by both the Rotorua District Court and the High Court at Auckland when it over-ruled bail granted in the district court to one of those named, Jamie Beattie Lockett.

The other known accused, Tame Iti, was refused bail after a hearing over three days. The public has not been told the reason. According to his lawyer, Annette Sykes, the judge at the hearing was concerned that media had reported material that was in a police summary of facts for the court. If so, it has not added much light.

Maori Law Commission spokesman Moana Jackson, also present at the hearing, believes the police are using powers under anti-terrorism legislation to hold suspects for an indefinite period while they investigate further charges.

The impression being given, coupled with the anger from townships that felt the force of the armed police squads this week, is not bolstering confidence in the operation.

The best the Herald has been able to discover is that two young hunters in the Ureweras came upon a group of about 15 armed men, mostly Maori, in military camouflage who seemed to be practising commando manoeuvres. The group took a hostile attitude to the hunters who retreated and reported the encounter to police outside the region.

Local police appear not to have been involved in this week's raids, carried out by 300 officers in Ruatoki, Whakatane, Rotorua, Hamilton, Auckland and Wellington.

It followed a surveillance operation using phone taps, intercepted text messages and secret video recordings. Something happened, or something was said, to cause the police to act on Monday "in the interests of public safety", said Mr Broad.

The public deserves better than this. If the police were sufficiently sure of a specific risk to public safety to take the action they have, they surely could say more about it. If they have yet to collect the evidence to substantiate their suspicions they had better find it. If they have raided family's homes, offended communities and alarmed the country over the play-acting of fantasists, they are going to look as foolish as those they have monitored. The threat had better be serious.