Surfers are spoken by the police officers at Piha Beach during the Covid-19 lockdown in early April, when surfing was declared a prohibited activity by the Government. Photo / Alex Burton
Surfers are spoken by the police officers at Piha Beach during the Covid-19 lockdown in early April, when surfing was declared a prohibited activity by the Government. Photo / Alex Burton
New Zealand's Law Society has recommended nine amendments to the controversial Covid-19 Public Health Response Act, which gave police the power to potentially enter homes without a search warrant.
The legislation, which was passed under urgency last month to help combat the global coronavirus pandemic, enables orders imposing the most profound peacetime restrictions ever made to the rights and personal freedoms of Kiwis, the Law Society said.
It told Parliament's Finance and Expenditure Committee yesterday that it agreed new laws were needed to deal with the ongoing public health response, and the new framework was an improvement, but it should still have had public and select committee scrutiny before being passed.
"Allowing just a few days for the usual select committee process would have enabled better consideration of the legislation before it was enacted, and increased its public legitimacy," Law Society spokesperson Jonathan Orpin-Dowell told the committee.
The rushed process has already drawn heavy criticism by academics and lawyers, while chief human rights commissioner Paul Hunt called it "a great failure of our democratic process".
The National Party and Act Party both voted against the then bill at its third reading, describing it an overreach of state powers and lacking proper scrutiny.
Addressing the committee, the Law Society recommended nine changes to help provide additional safeguards on the exercise of powers under the law. The society said it was important to reconsider the risk threshold for police to exercise the power to enter premises, including private homes, without a warrant.
Warrantless powers of entry should only be for cases where a police officer has reasonable grounds to believe it is necessary to enter premises to provide a direction to prevent an immediate risk to the life or safety of any person, the Law Society suggested.
"One important amendment is to impose a higher threshold for the making of a section 11 order, that the Minister [of Health] is satisfied the order is 'reasonably necessary' as a proportionate response taking into account wider economic and social considerations," Orpin-Dowell said.
Other recommended amendments included strengthening Parliament's oversight and scrutiny of orders, and improving New Zealanders' ability to access orders so they can understand and comply with the law.
A post-enactment review of the law by the Finance and Expenditure Committee had the Law Society's support, which it said was an opportunity to review and improve the Act.
A report on the review is due on July 27.
"The problem however is that time is very short to allow Parliament to consider and amend the Act before Parliament adjourns on 6 August ahead of the general election – and it is essential any amendment bill introduced to correct shortcomings that weren't picked up earlier because the Act was passed under urgency, is given proper select committee scrutiny," Orpin-Dowell said.
The Law Society asked the committee to report to Parliament at the earliest available date, to allow time for any proposed amendments to be considered and enacted without using urgency. It said this was particularly important if the new powers were used in the event there is a resurgence of Covid-19 cases and New Zealand returns to a higher alert level.
"As is now well known, restrictions in alert levels 4 and 3 impacted on almost every aspect of New Zealanders' lives, and restrictions on the rights and freedoms of all New Zealanders may be imposed again under the new Act," Orpin-Dowell said.
