Pure waste

Last week the government ended its persecution of the Waihopai Three. So how much did this pointless exercise in vengeance cost? $93,000 according to an OIA request lodged through FYI. $87,000 of that will be billed to the GCSB; the remainder is time which will be written off by Crown Law.

This is pure waste. The damages claim against the protesters would not have achieved anything, as they had no money to extract. All it was was revenge for the GCSB's deflated ego. You can judge whether that was an appropriate use of taxpayer's money at the ballot box later this year.

Ending the persecution of the Waihopai Three

Back in 2008, three peace activists broke into the GCSB/NSA spy base at Waihopai and deflated one of the satellite domes. They were subsequently prosecuted for criminal damage, but acquitted by a jury. The government, in an act of petty vindictiveness, has since been pursuing them for $1.2 million of damages. It knows they can never pay, so the sole object is to drive them into bankruptcy as punishment for standing up to the spies.

But now the government seems to have come to its senses and is ending this persecution:

The Crown has dropped its civil lawsuit against the three men who caused more than $1 million in damage to a spy base in Marlborough.

In 2008, Dominican friar Peter Murnane, farmer Samuel Land and teacher Adrian Leason entered Waihopai and punctured an inflatable dome covering a large satellite dish.

The three peace protesters believed the base was being used to further the Iraq war.

Good. The government had its go at them with criminal charges, and they failed. Anything else is simply persecution. Meanwhile, I'm wondering how much this pointless and petty act of vengeance has cost us. One million? Two? How many school lunches could that have paid for? Hopefully some enterprising journalists will find out in the next few days.

The vengeful crown

Earlier in the year, the government was humiliated when three men who had entered the Waihopai spy base and deflated one of its protective domes were acquitted by a jury. So now, in a clear attempt to bypass the BORA rule on double jeopardy, they're suing them for damages.

This is a pointless act of revenge. As the Waihopai Three pointed out when this threat was first made last year, none of them have any money. Hell, one of them is a Dominican Friar, and thus sworn to poverty. The sole purpose of this suit is to legally harass and victimise these men and salvage the government's wounded pride by gaining some sort of verdict against them. They couldn't stick them in jail, so they're going to drive them into bankruptcy instead. And they're going to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money in order to do so.

Unlike the Attorney-General, my penis does not shrivel at the thought that the state's power has been successfully defied. Neither does it see any value in trying to extract money where there is none. The government has already tried to punish these men. It failed. It should accept that and move on. This suit is simply an exercise in persecution. And that is not the act of a just government, but of a vengeful crown.

Bailed

The Waihopai three have now been bailed after spending five days in jail. Good. As I pointed out last week, bail is a human right in this country, and it was difficult to see what justification there was for holding them on remand rather than releasing them.

They'll be back in court in June.

No Sabotage

Police have confirmed that the Waihopai protestors will not be charged with sabotage. Good. It was drawing a very long bow anyway, and with the GCSB publicly stating that Waihopai deals mainly with trade details, it would have been ridiculous for the police to claim that it was vital to the security of New Zealand (unless by "security" they mean "lining rich people's pockets" - which wouldn't be the first time such claims have been made).

Meanwhile, the protestors are still held on remand, which is odd. Bail is a human right in this country, and the only reasons for denying it are a risk of non-appearance, a risk of reoffending, or a risk that the accused will interfere with witnesses. None of these seem to be true in this case - so why are they still in jail?

Sabotage

So, the police are talking about charging the Waihopai trespassers with sabotage. That will be fun. Such a charge would rest on the implicit claim that the Waihopai spy base was essential to the "safety, security, or defence of New Zealand" - a claim which can then be put under the spotlight and challenged by the defence. This would not just allow the accused to use the court to publicise their beliefs (since they would be both highly relevant to intent and could be used to undermine the government's claim); it would also allow them to probe to some extent (and with the backing of the court) what goes on at Waihopai. And that I suspect is the last thing the paranoid security freaks in our defence establishment will want.