Is New Zealand a 'police state' or a soft touch for armed political activists? This week has seen two significant developments that will have some people pondering this question.
First, the judgement in the Urewera court case was finally made, and today there are two very good commentaries on the saga - the Dominion Post's editorial, Costly Urewera defence hollow, and Chris Trotter's blogpost, Failing The Crown. Both commentaries put forward a trenchant criticism of all involved. The Dominion Post says, 'The list of people and organisations which emerge with their reputations enhanced from the Urewera trial is short. The list of those who emerge with their reputations tarnished is considerably longer. It includes law-makers, the police, the four defendants - Tame Iti, Te Rangikaiwhiria Kemara, Urs Signer and Emily Bailey'. Politicians get the blame for passing the poorly drafted anti-terrorism legislation simply to align New Zealand with the west's 'War on Terror', the police are blamed for their heavy-handed and illegal operations, and the accused - as well as fellow activist Valerie Morse - are rubbished for their lack of credibility in justifying their actions.
Chris Trotter's blogpost details the many mistakes of the police and state. But he also cautions against 'those on the Left who are celebrating the outcome of this trial as some sort of "victory"' and concludes with a challenge: 'The accused's moral responsibility: to explain to New Zealand exactly what they were doing in the Ureweras, and why; remains similarly unfulfilled'. Similary, the Dom Post says, 'Before making further pleas for sympathy, Ms Morse might like to explain to the public exactly what she was doing in the bush with a pistol.'
Three other items in the blogosphere help make sense of the Urewera issue: Martyn Bradbury counts the financial cost of the whole affair (True cost of Urewera case closer to $14 million), Joshua Hitchcock discusses the repercussions for some of the political parties (Reflections on The Urewera), and Toby Manhire surveys what the bloggers are saying.
The second major development involving police operations and political activism comes from the Government's successful passing of the Search and Surveillance Bill. Danya Levy's report, Search and Surveillance Bill passes, explains some of the reasons that Opposition parties were yelling out 'Police State' in Parliament last night, as the bill was narrowly passed by 61 votes to 57. The Mana Party says that the legislation provides 70 government agencies with the ability to obtain surveillance warrants based on suspicion of a crime. The Greens say that those agencies will now have the powers 'exercised by police in its heavily criticised 2007 so-called "terror raids" in Ruatoki'. And according to Audrey Young's Labour fails to change search bill, Labour unsuccessfully battled 'to have the powers of the Serious Fraud Office included in the law and to have journalists exempted from powers that could compel them to reveal their sources'. For a further critique of the bill, see TVNZ: Fears new surveillance law too powerful, which details the concerns of Thomas Beagle from the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties.