Should prisoners have reduced human rights? Minister of Police Paula Bennett seems to think some should be treated differently
RNZ: Serious criminals ‘have fewer human rights’ – National
Serious criminals should have fewer human rights than others, according to the National Party’s police spokesperson Paula Bennett.
Ms Bennett and the party’s leader Bill English have announced National’s policy to crack down on gangs and the supply and manufacture of methamphetamine.
The plan would give police the power to search the cars and houses of the most serious criminal gang members, at any time, for firearms through the use of new prohibition orders, which would be given at the discretion of police.
I have two serious concerns so far. If they want to search cars and houses that surely means suspected criminals, or alleged criminals.
And ‘discretion of police’ sounds warning bells. Surely there should be some checks on what the police can do, like needing to obtain warrants.
Ms Bennett said that would probably breach the human rights of those gang members.
That’s a worrying admission.
“We just feel that there are some gang members that are creating more harm and continuing to.
“Some have fewer human rights than others when they are creating a string of victims behind them … there is a different standard.”
Mr English said he was comfortable with the policy.
“We’re comfortable that this is a tool which will enable the front line of our police to deal more effectively with the structure of the distribution of meth and the dangers of firearms.
“It will go right through the legislative process, so of course this will be argued.”
Without seeing details I’m quite uncomfortable with this.
National’s plan would invest $42 million over four years to fund a crackdown on gangs and the supply of serious drugs.
Aside from new police powers, it would double the number of drug dog teams and introduce them in domestic airports, ferries and mail centres to clamp down on trafficking. Penalties for manufacturing and distributing synthetic cannabis would be increased from a maximum of two years’ imprisonment to eight years, but no changes to charges for possession.
Gang members on a benefit would also have to justify expensive assets worth more than $10,000, otherwise their benefit could be cancelled or be declined.
Ms Bennett said serious drugs like methamphetamine and the gangs who peddle them were a scourge on society.
“These drug dealers are destroying lives for profit and greed and these drugs have no place in our country.”
I agree that drug pushing and dealing is abhorrent and a serious problem, but as important as it is to try to combat this more effectively it is also important to have a High standard of human rights, and also adequate controls on police investigations and enforcement.
What if the Police search someone’s car or house and find no drugs or firearms? Too bad, as long as they look a bit like criminals?
UPDATE: The Spinof – Mask off: National decides gang members have “fewer human rights”
If you can – and this is clearly impossible – detach yourself from its horror, the policy is fascinating as a perfect view into the debates which roil inside the National party. It perfectly encapsulates the two impulses it has contained, in announcing 1500 new drug treatment places (seems good, seems like the modern, friendly, Bill English wing) while also promising to just wander into the homes of gang members, without a warrant, just because.
Its launch at a West Auckland drug treatment facility captures the squirming dichotomy perfectly. It is meant to scream ‘we care’ to the mainstream on the 6pm news, while the “fewer human rights” grab will play on ZB tomorrow, a bone for the tough-on-crime crowd to gnaw on.
What we’re really seeing is the party under sustained pressure for the first time in nine years…
Hence this policy, one which seems ripped from the ‘70s headlines, asserting that certain types of New Zealanders are fundamentally less human than others. It’s the National party of old’s coffin lid creaking open, a zombie back out to fight an election in 2017. We’ll find out what Bill English really thinks about it when he records his episode of the 9th Floor. Unless this somewhat grotesque new strategy gains traction, that moment won’t be far off.
I think this policy has the potential to stuff any chance National has of reversing Labour’s positive momentum. It may appeal to Natikonal’s base and some further to the right with few other voting options, but it is going to struggle with the swing voters who have been veering towards Labour.