A police officer gives the thumbs up for a vehicle to carry on through the Covid prevention border at Uretiti. Photo Tania Whyte, File
A police officer gives the thumbs up for a vehicle to carry on through the Covid prevention border at Uretiti. Photo Tania Whyte, File
Editorial
EDITORIAL
Police Minister Chris Hipkins is right to demand answers over the revelation that officers faked car theft reports to pursue women whose travel sparked the Northland lockdown last year.
However, his response doesn't go nearly far enough.
Hipkins has said he will wait to find out exactly what happenedbefore passing judgment on how serious this matter was. While a rush to judge is often unwise, the seriousness is already clear from the documents released to the Herald by the police themselves.
Police have confirmed that senior officers invented a crime and falsely listed vehicles as "stolen" to gain access to powerful tracking capabilities of privately owned CCTV systems. It is a clear case where a "nothing-to-see-here" response won't wash.
Police were seeking the women as part of an investigation to find out whether they had used false information to get travel permits. It emerged they had not - a government worker issued border passes in error allowed the travel and then led to the lockdown after one of the women tested positive for Covid-19.
Illustration / Rod Emmerson
Documents released through the Official Information Act showed police from detective to detective inspector rank detailed the false registering of a car as stolen up to the point they got the information sought and then removed the "stolen" tag.
Hipkins appeared to attempt to assuage the understandable outrage by stating police could have obtained the information they were after by other means but "may not have used the appropriate avenue".
He also pointed out there was "a huge amount of pressure at the time" to find the women.
Entering false information into police databases simply cannot be countenanced. This was part of a criminal investigation and, had it resulted in court action, would have been clearly challengeable, most likely successfully.
More importantly, is the damage to police credibility and the faith of the public.
Police officers carry out services essential to the running and wellbeing of the country. Many hours were spent in dutiful service during the pandemic to prevent spread across the country and undoubtedly save lives. Officers put themselves in harm's way for our sake. All this is recognised, appreciated and applauded.
But the minister must be aware of other episodes of overreach such as the exploitation of the Privacy Act to access writer Nicky Hager's personal information and officers routinely but illegally photographing and filming young people for little or no cause.
Police work is difficult and stressful. But officers do themselves, their colleagues and the service no credit by cutting corners. There are often unique circumstances but precedence can be an entranceway to a slippery slope in standards. The house must be kept in order.
For the integrity of the police and for the public trust in the force and officers, there needs to be a full and open clearing out of any such dubious practices.
The minister should assure the public of nothing less.
