Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010 is an Act of Parliament in New Zealand that denies parole to certain repeat offenders and to offenders guilty of the worse murders, and imposes maximum terms of imprisonment on persistent repeat offenders who continue to commit serious violent offences.[2] The law is known informally in New Zealand public, media and government circles as the "three-strikes law".[3][4][5][6]

Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010
New Zealand Parliament
Passed25 March 2010
Royal assent31 May 2010[1]
Commenced1 June 2010
Introduced byJudith Collins[1]
Status: Current legislation

The bill passed its third reading on 25 May 2010. It was supported by the conservative National and libertarian ACT parties but was opposed by the Labour, Green, and Māori parties.[3] It became law when it received royal assent on 31 May 2010.[7]

Legislative features

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010 creates a three-stage system of increasing consequences for repeat serious violent offenders. The Act covers 40 qualifying offences comprising all major violent and sexual offences with a maximum penalty of seven years or greater imprisonment, including murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, sexual violation, abduction, kidnapping, and aggravated robbery.[4][8] Since the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 prohibits retroactive application of laws to disadvantage an offender, the law only applies to offences committed on or after 1 June 2010.

A first warning is issued after an offender who is aged 18 or over is convicted of a qualifying offence. Once the offender has received a "first-strike" warning, it stays on their criminal record permanently unless their conviction is overturned. The warning must be given verbally by the Judge and followed up in writing for it to be valid.[9] If the offender is subsequently convicted of another qualifying offence, they receive a final warning. If they are sentenced to a term of imprisonment, they will serve that sentence in full without the possibility of parole. The first and final warnings will stay on the offender's record.[4][8]

On conviction of a third qualifying offence, the court must impose the maximum penalty for the offence on the defendant. The legislation stipulates that if the offence the court must also order that the sentence be served without parole, unless the qualifying offence is manslaughter or court considers that it would be manifestly unjust. In cases of manslaughter, a minimum non-parole period of 20 years applies instead, unless the court considers that it would be manifestly unjust, in which case the standard 10-year non-period for life imprisonment applies.[4][8]

If the second or third qualifying offence is murder, then the court must impose a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole, unless it deems it manifestly unjust to do so.[10]

In the case a previous qualifying offence is overturned, the courts must set aside all other qualifying offences' sentences and warnings, and re-sentence and re-warn as if the overturned offence never occurred. Sentencing judges for second and third qualifying offences must state in their sentencing judgment the sentence they would have given but for the Act to assist in case of re-sentencing.[11]

History

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Act was first introduced into the New Zealand House of Representatives on 18 February 2009. Per New Zealand Parliamentary process, the proposed law went through three readings. It passed its first reading on 18 May 2009. The select committee reported back to the House on 26 March 2010, recommending the bill to proceed with modifications. The largest modification was changing the third strike penalty from life imprisonment with 25 years non-parole to the maximum sentence without parole, after the Attorney-General found the original penalty breached the cruel and unusual punishment provisions in the New Zealand Bill of Right Acts. The Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill passed its second reading on 4 May 2010. On 25 May 2010, the Act passed its third and final reading; becoming law on 31 May 2010.[1] While the ruling National and ACT parties supported the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act, the government's support partner the Māori Party joined the opposition Labour and Green parties in opposing the law's passage.[3]

Since its passage, the so-called "three-strikes law" has been controversial in New Zealand society. Critics have criticized the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act for its alleged punitive approach to justice and for disproportionately affected the Māori community.[12][6] By contrast, it has been supported by conservative advocacy groups such as the Sensible Sentencing Trust and Family First New Zealand.[5][13]

In August 2016, the Court of Appeal in R v Harrison & Ors established the scope of the "manifestly unjust" provision in section 86E. The Crown appealed two cases involving murder as the second qualifying offence where the sentencing judges exercised the manifestly unjust provision and refused to give the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The first qualifying offence in each case was indecent assault and wounding with intent to injure, both which carry a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment and therefore at the bottom of the scale of serious violent offence. The Court dismissed the appeal, ruling that in order to not breach the cruel and unusual punishment provisions in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, manifest injustice had to have a broad scope. This ruling has effectively made section 86E of the Act unenforceable, at least if murder is a second qualifying offence following a non-homicide first qualifying offence.[14]

Following the formation of the Labour coalition government after the 2017 general election, Labour's Justice Minister Andrew Little announced that it would be scrapping the three-strikes law. Little argued that the law was doing little to facilitate rehabilitation of violent offenders and was contributing to New Zealand's growing prison population. Little's announcement was criticized by ACT Party leader David Seymour.[15][16]

On 30 May 2018, Justice Minister Little announced that the Labour coalition government would be taking steps to repeal the "three-strikes law" in early June.[17] In response, the Sensible Sentencing Trust's founder Garth McVicar commissioned a poll of 965 adults which claimed that 68 percent of New Zealanders approved of the law and 20 percent did not; including 63 percent of Labour supporters and 48 percent of Green supporters.[18] On 11 June 2018, Andrew Little announced that the Government would be abandoning its efforts to repeal the "three-strikes law" due to opposition from its coalition partner, the populist conservative New Zealand First.[19][20][21]

Statistics
YearFirst warningFinal warningThird strike
2010 160––
2011 9111–
2012 1,31012–
2013 1,33316–
2014 1,27533–
2015 1,29152–
2016 1,425561
2017 1,506831
2018 1,5211015
2019 1,313 109 6

[4]

References
  1. "Sentencing Parole and Reform Bill". New Zealand Parliament. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  2. "Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010: Purpose". New Zealand Legislation. Parliamentary Counsel Office. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  3. "Controversial 'three strikes' bill passes". The New Zealand Herald. New Zealand Press Association. 25 May 2010. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  4. "Three strikes statistics". Ministry of Justice. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  5. "Three Strikes". Sensible Sentencing Trust. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  6. Rumbles, W. (2011). "'Three Strikes' sentencing: Another blow for Māori". Waikato Journal of Law. 19 (2): 108–116. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  7. "Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010". New Zealand Legislation. Parliamentary Counsel Office. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  8. "Qualifying offences in the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010". New Zealand Parliament. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  9. R v Allen, 2018 NZDC 14972 (27 July 2018).
  10. Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010, Section 86E
  11. Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010, Section 86F and 86G
  12. Marcetic, Branko (14 June 2018). "A brief history of New Zealand's most absurd three-strikes cases". The Spinoff. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  13. "Three Strikes Law". Family First New Zealand. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  14. R v Harrison & Ors, 2016 NZCA 381 (10 August 2016).
  15. Braae, Alex; Cook, Miranda (1 November 2017). "Three strikes and it's out: Labour scrapping controversial law". Newstalk ZB. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
  16. "Three strikes law to be scrapped – Little". Radio New Zealand. 1 November 2017. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
  17. "Beginning of the end for three strikes law". Stuff.co.nz. 30 May 2018. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  18. Akoorie, Natalie (2 June 2018). "Three strikes law supported by 68 per cent of Kiwis, survey finds". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  19. "NZ First forces Labour to ditch three strikes law repeal". Newstalk ZB. 11 June 2018. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  20. Young, Audrey (11 June 2018). "Sensible Sentencing Trust thanks NZ First for halting plans to repeal of Three Strikes law". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  21. "Three strikes law to stay as Labour say NZ First unlikely to support repealing it – 'This is about making good decisions, not fast decisions'". 1 News. 11 June 2018. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.