Royal Commission into Christchurch mosque attacks begins this week

A second commissioner has been appointed and the Royal Commission into the Christchurch Mosque attacks on 15 March will begin this week.


Terror attack Royal Commission begins work

The Royal Commission into the March 15 terror attack will begin considering evidence next week following the appointment of the second and final commissioner.

Former diplomat Jacqui Caine, the former New Zealand Ambassador to Chile and most recently Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Director of Special Projects in Christchurch, will join the Commission Chair Sir William Young.

“The Government is confident that the Royal Commission now has the right people in place to carry out the important task of fully understanding what happened in the lead up to the March 15 terror attack, what could have been done to stop it and how we can keep New Zealanders safe,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said.

The Commission has already been established, is scheduled to begin considering evidence from Monday and is due to report by 10 December 2019.

Ms Caine has resigned from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to take up the role.

“This is a critical part of our ongoing response to the attack. The Commission’s findings will help to ensure such an attack never happens here again,” Jacinda Ardern said.


Details on the Royal Commission into the attack on the Christchurch Mosques on 15 March 2019

Background

1. On 15 March 2019 fifty people were killed and over fifty others injured, some seriously, when an individual attacked the Al Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch while worshippers were at prayer.  An individual has been charged with offences in relation to the attack and awaits trial.

2. The Government has announced a Royal Commission will be appointed to inquire into what relevant state sector agencies knew about the individual’s activities before the attack, what, if anything, they did with that information, what measures agencies could have taken to prevent this attack, and what measures agencies should take to prevent such attacks in the future.

3. The Inquiry needs to report on these matters urgently, so Government has an independent and authoritative report on these matters to reassure the New Zealand public, including its Muslim communities, that all appropriate measures are being taken by state sector agencies to ensure their safety and protection.

4. Government expects the Inquiry to connect with New Zealand’s Muslim communities on these matters.

5. Government has received assurances and expects that all relevant state sector agencies, officers and employees will do their utmost to cooperate with the Inquiry given the importance of the issues it is charged with examining and reporting on.

Purpose and matter of public importance

6. The matter of public importance which the Inquiry is directed to examine is

  • what relevant state sector agencies knew about the activities of the individual who has been charged with offences in relation to the 15 March 2019 attack on the Al-Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, before that attack;
  • what actions (if any) they took in light of that knowledge;
  • whether there were any additional measures that the agencies could have taken to prevent the attack, and
  • what additional measures should be taken by relevant state sector agencies to prevent such attacks in future.

Terms of Reference for the Royal Commission into the Attack on Christchurch Mosques on 15 March 2019, as approved by Cabinet on 8 April 2019:

Leave a comment

11 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  13th May 2019

    Most – apart from a couple – of commentators on this blog could, with a minimum amount of required information, give the government all they needed to know.

    More waste from a government who requires an inquiry of some kind to find answers that are staring them in the face.

    Reply
    • Duker

       /  13th May 2019

      What an appalling ignorant thing to say.

      “On 29 November 2010 the Government announced the establishment of a Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy. The Royal Commission has broad terms of reference. It will seek to: Establish what happened at the Pike River Mine and why.”
      What say you smarty pants

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  13th May 2019

        I’m not an expert on mines, neither is 99.9% of the population. However, an alleged lone gunman shooting up a mosque without help..when help was needed. Who had a manifesto…who wasn’t picked up by our security services because that’s almost impossible, and even if it was, our services had already let militant Imams into the country under their noses, so not a lot could be expected in this situation. I haven’t read the TOR.. but I would expect it to cover much ground that isn’t necessary to pursue in my opinion.

        Duker, I previously stated only a couple of people on this blog couldn’t give the government the information they need on this issue….make that three.

        Reply
        • Duker

           /  13th May 2019

          Because your information is limited ( ie you never do research) dont assume other ordinaryy people can ‘can come up with the answers’
          For others education , since you are an [self redacted]

          Purpose of inquiry and matter of public importance
          The matter of public importance that the inquiry is directed to examine is—
          (a)
          what relevant State sector agencies knew about the activities of the individual who has been charged with offences in relation to the 15 March 2019 attack on the Al-Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, before that attack; and
          (b)
          what actions (if any) relevant State sector agencies took in light of that knowledge; and
          (c)
          whether there were any additional measures that relevant State sector agencies could have taken to prevent the attack; and
          (d)
          what additional measures should be taken by relevant State sector agencies to prevent such attacks in the future.
          3 Scope of inquiry
          In order to achieve its purpose, the inquiry must inquire into—
          (a)
          the individual’s activities before the attack, including—
          (i)
          relevant information from his time in Australia; and
          (ii)
          his arrival and residence in New Zealand; and
          (iii)
          his travel within New Zealand, and internationally; and
          (iv)
          how he obtained a gun licence, weapons, and ammunition; and
          (v)
          his use of social media and other online media; and
          (vi)
          his connections with others, whether in New Zealand or internationally; and
          (b)
          what relevant State sector agencies knew about this individual and his activities before the attack, what actions (if any) they took in light of that knowledge, and whether there were any additional measures that the agencies could have taken to prevent the attack; and
          (c)
          whether there were any impediments to relevant State sector agencies gathering or sharing information relevant to the attack, or acting on such information, including legislative impediments; and
          (d)
          whether there was any inappropriate concentration of, or priority setting for, counter-terrorism resources by relevant State sector agencies prior to the attack.
          4 Matters upon which findings are sought
          The inquiry must report its findings on the following matters:
          (a)
          whether there was any information provided or otherwise available to relevant State sector agencies that could or should have alerted them to the attack and, if such information was provided or otherwise available, how the agencies responded to any such information, and whether that response was appropriate; and
          (b)
          the interaction amongst relevant State sector agencies, including whether there was any failure in information sharing between the relevant agencies; and
          (c)
          whether relevant State sector agencies failed to anticipate or plan for the attack due to an inappropriate concentration of counter-terrorism resources or priorities on other terrorism threats; and
          (d)
          whether any relevant State sector agency failed to meet required standards or was otherwise at fault, whether in whole or in part; and
          (e)
          any other matters relevant to the purpose of the inquiry, to the extent necessary to provide a complete report.
          http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0072/12.0/whole.html
          https://christchurchattack.royalcommission.nz/

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  13th May 2019

            Duker, are you doubting the expertise of the (soi-disant) YNZ expert on Islam ?

            I don’t know why the Commission doesn’t just ask him; it would save much time and money.

            Reply
          • Corky

             /  13th May 2019

            Do you have a reading problem. Duke? Let’s see.

            ”How he obtained a gun licence, weapons, and ammunition.”

            That has been answered. Although no one has been held accountable. And may need a relook..by the police.

            ”His use of social media and other online media; and
            (vi)
            his connections with others, whether in New Zealand or internationally”

            Five minutes work.

            There is only one place I would visit for information…our security intelligence services.

            That’s it. Given the Intelligence services are connected to many government departments, red flag failures are in the court of said intelligence services
            ( in the main). If not, its a quick fix in the relevant ministry. Anyone would think this is rocket science.

            Do you understand you gormless wonder? I would have no problem if you were paying for this. But I’m paying as well…for an enquiry that will be padded out and come up with recommendations anyone on this blog, apart from you three, could have provided. 🙄✔

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  13th May 2019

              Duker, Corky doesn’t seem to realise that there is more to it than what we have heard & read on the news. He doesn’t realise that people do NOT have access to classified information, not even him.

              His first comments said that with a certain amount of INFORMATION, anyone here with two (now three exceptions) could tell the commission all it wanted to know. This is, of course, ridiculous. He has changed this to ‘recommendations’. He has no idea, from the sound of it, that recommendations without all the information that nobody on YNZ has or will have are meaningless. Yes, anyone could make a recommendation…but an uninformed recommendation is worse than useless.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  13th May 2019

          Who are the militant Imans ?

          Name five of them,

          Reply
  2. NOEL

     /  13th May 2019

    “If the pollies had not rejected the recommendations of the 2017 Firearms review could this shooting have occurred?” Nah, conveniently a no go area for the Commission.

    Reply
  3. harryk

     /  13th May 2019

    Intelligence agencies are not self tasking. Nor should they be. What the Terms of Reference seem to prevent is an investigation of whether Intelligence agencies were failed by their Ministers. If a RC such as this were to find that Christchurch had been an intelligence failure not a political failure, and to recommend more latitude for Agencies to self task without prior, specific, democratically elected Ministerial direction, there will need to be new and stronger protection for civil liberties as well.

    Reply
  4. Corky

     /  13th May 2019

    Interesting. Upon my daily duty of proving Kitty wrong again, I found the links to the articles in Investigate Magazine wouldn’t work. I wonder if the hurt has been applied to Wishart. I must email him. I could pulled my magazines out to find the articles, but that would be a waste of my time on someone of no importance. However, I did find this. The dude has interesting views – hell, he’s even preached in Dunedin.

    Preachers of Hate – Rugged Phones Direct NZ – Investigate Magazine
    https://investigatemagazine.co.nz › Islamofascism

    ”Mar 30, 2007 – HELEN HOODWINKED BY PREACHERS OF HATE …. “During his visit to New Zealand,” says the report, “Dr Bilal held lectures in Dunedin, …… Now that has been coming out very strongly, the imams have been telling their ..”

    😃✔

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s