The case of Christopher Taunoa and Others v Attorney General, which sparked the whole row over prisoner compensation and gave us the Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Act, will be going all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court has granted leave [PDF] for both parties to appeal: the prisoners on the questions of whether they were treated in a cruel, inhuman or degrading manner or denied natural justice after they complained about their mistreatment (both in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990), and the crown on whether the amount of compensation awarded was appropriate. The case will not be affected by the Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Act, as it was before the courts before the legislation was passed.
No doubt this will cause another outpouring of wailing and gnashing of teeth from across the political spectrum, and further calls for prisoners to be denied any access to the courts. But these calls are themselves repugnant to justice. If we are to have a justice system, we must accept that justice cannot be denied to anyone, and that the law binds even the state and its servants. Otherwise, we don't have a justice system, but the depredations of an organised gang.
It's arguably unethical (I don't actually think it is, but I'll still be careful) for me to comment too much on this, however I thought I ought to clear up a misconception, as your following quote is quite misleading:
ReplyDelete"The case will not be affected by the Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Act, as it was before the courts before the legislation was passed."
If Taunoa et. al. ultimately do get monetary compensation, that compensation will be subject to claims before a Victims' Special Claims Tribunal.