Sedition verdict 'harms free speech'

A jury took just three hours to find Selwyn guilty of sedition. File Picture / Richard Robinson

A man found guilty of sedition yesterday says the verdict puts the state of freedom of speech allowed in New Zealand on a par with repressive states Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia and Malaysia.

An Auckland District Court jury took just three hours to find Tim Selwyn, 31, guilty on one charge of publishing a statement with seditious intent.

He was acquitted of a charge of being party to a seditious conspiracy.

He faces up to two years in prison. He was released on bail to return for sentencing on July 18.

The freelance writer, from Grey Lynn, Auckland, earlier admitted to conspiring to commit wilful damage when an axe was embedded in Prime Minister Helen Clark's electoral office window in November 2004.

He had admitted in court to "having a hand" in two separate statements claiming responsibility for the axe attack and calling for others to commit acts of civil disobedience.

One bundle of pamphlets was left outside the Mt Albert electoral office, and the second on a powerbox in Ponsonby Rd, 2km away, on the same night as the axe attack.

The jury found material in the second statement to be seditious.

It was designed as a press release and called for "like minded New Zealanders to take similar action of their own".

The first statement had called upon "like minded New Zealanders to commit their own acts of civil disobedience".

His actions were in protest of the Government's foreshore and seabed legislation, which he said was being rushed through Parliament at the time.

"The Crown has made history today," Selwyn said outside court.

"It's a press release, right? It's totally taken out of context. [The jury] has criminalised it. It was only given to the media to incite the media to acts of journalism.

"That the Crown has brought these charges is dangerous, but the fact they have got a verdict that went their way is even more alarming. It puts us in a league with Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Malaysia ... as far as Government repression of freedom of speech goes.

Crown prosecutor David Johnstone had asked Selwyn on Wednesday whether putting an axe through the window was an act displaying civil disobedience. Selwyn replied: "Only at the very extreme end. Some people might see it as that, but that's not what the intention is of those documents."

The axe, he said, symbolised determination and the broken glass the shattered justice of the Foreshore and Seabed Act.

Detective Inspector Millar Rewi said Selwyn's conviction for sedition was the first he could recall in New Zealand's recent history.

"I'm pleased with that result," Mr Rewi said. "The evidence we had fell within the parameters of the charges that Mr Selwyn faced."

Selwyn said he would talk with his lawyer about overturning the verdict.

He said he was one of many, including former Prime Minister and current Law Commission president Sir Geoffrey Palmer, who felt sedition laws were outdated.

Auckland Council of Civil Liberties president Barry Wilson said consideration should be given to repealing the law. "It could be a convenient way of restraining public debate on controversial matters."

THE CRIME

* Tim Selwyn took part in a protest which put an axe through the window of Prime Minister Helen Clark's electoral office.

* He wrote a press release encouraging others to follow his example.

* For this the jury found him guilty of sedition, which is defined as "speech, writing or behaviour intended to encourage rebellion or resistance against the government".

A HISTORY OF SEDITION CONVICTIONS

* 1913: Maoriland Worker editor Henry Holland and unionist Tom Barker were charged with sedition during the 1913 waterfront dispute. Holland was sentenced to prison for a year, of which he served 3 1/2 months. Barker received a three-month sentence. Seamans union leader William Young was jailed for two months for sedition and inciting violence.

* 1916: Peter Fraser, later Labour Prime Minister, was sentenced to 12 months, which he served, for calling for an end to conscription through repeal of the Military Service Act. Fraser's defence was that in arguing for the repeal of the law rather than disobedience or resistance to it, he was acting within his constitutional rights.

* 1916: Hubert Armstrong was sentenced to a year's imprisonment after he told a street-corner meeting that conscription was more about controlling and intimidating a disaffected proletariat than about beating Germany, and would be unnecessary if soldiers were adequately paid.

* 1918: Hiram Hunter campaigned against compulsory service as secretary-treasurer of the United Federation of Labour. In 1918 he received a three-month prison sentence for sedition, but was released after 19 days.

* 1942: The Rev Ormond Burton, editor of the Christian Pacifist Society newsletter, was convicted in the Supreme Court in 1942 for "editing, publishing and attempting to publish a subversive document". Burton argued for his democratic right to think and speak as conscience dictated. Justice Archibald Blair disagreed, telling the jury it was a time when the mouths of cranks would have to shut. Burton was sentenced to 2 years' prison.

Sources: Caslon Analytics (www.caslon.com.au), Dictionary of New Zealand Biography (www.dnzb.govt.nz/dnzb/)