KEY POINTS:
A bill creating a new crime of carrying out a terrorist act has passed its third reading in Parliament.
The Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill was passed 108-13 this afternoon.
Prime Minister Helen Clark yesterday said the amendment bill needed to go through or New Zealand would fail to meet international legal obligations.
The prime minister told reporters today the amending bill needed to go through Parliament because previous legislation expired.
"It is the intention of New Zealand governments to comply with UN conventions where we have that international obligation."
That did not deal with the issues being reviewed by the Law Commission.
Miss Clark said the Government had an "open mind" on whether the legislation being reviewed by the Law Commission should be changed or not, and " whether there should be a lower level of test as to what constituted a conspiracy, whether there should or not be the ability to use intercept evidence more widely".
She had not advocated the police having more powers to intercept, as had been reported by some.
"We have an entirely open mind as to whether the law needs to be changed or not or whether existing laws should be used to disrupt such activities."
She said yesterday the fact police could not use intercepted evidence for prosecutions under the Arms Act was a factor behind using warrants for arrest under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
"That raises the question in everyone's mind as to whether had they (police) had the power to use the interception evidence under the Arms Act, whether they would have pursued the other course," she said.
Miss Clark said police had believed the group it was monitoring was worth prosecuting but it was found its alleged activities did not meet the threshold under the Act nor under conspiracy provisions of the Crimes Act.
"A possible course to consider is whether there should be a greater list of offences under the Arms Act where prosecutions mounted for those offences would be able to draw on intercept evidence."
Sorting these issues out was not relevant to the reason the amending bill was before Parliament.
"The reason it's there now is that it has always been the New Zealand Government's intention, any government any time, that where we ratify an international convention, we act in a way that is consistent with that convention. That requires us to act in a certain way on the designation of international terrorists."
Green MP Keith Locke disagreed with the prime minister, saying it would be "quite wrong" to proceed with the bill in light of the Law Commission review of the 2002 Terrorism Suppression Act.
Last week Solicitor-General David Collins rejected a police application to prosecute people - arrested last month during police raids over alleged training camps in Bay of Plenty - under this 2002 Act.
He said there was insufficient evidence to meet the high bar set by the law, which was focused on international not domestic terrorism and was overly complex.
He recommended the Act be reviewed by the Law Commission and Miss Clark said yesterday terms of reference were being drafted.
Mr Locke said previously that the amending bill should be suspended while the Law Commission carries out this review.
He said the amending bill introduced a whole new crime, of carrying out a terrorist act, at the very time when the definition of terrorism in the original Act was to be studied closely by the Law Commission.
- NZPA
