Tohu tātari:
Ruku Tātari
Nama ā-Tuhinga
Takanga o te wā
Applied Filters:
Sort: Wai number (ascending)
3.1.046
Pre hearing Represented - Party Submission/Memo

A Perkins / G Melvin (Crown), Filing Crown closing submissions (referenced as Wai 2540, #3.3.6), 15 Aug 16

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

19 Aug 2016
Rahinga: 810KB
2.5.013
Pre hearing - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

Memorandum-directions of Judge P J Savage concerning the parole report tendered at the urgent hearing in Wellington, 9 Aug 16

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

09 Aug 2016
Rahinga: 315KB
3.1.042(a)
Pre hearing Represented - Party Submission/Memo

A Perkins / G Melvin, Joint hearing timetable, 22 Jul 16

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

01 Aug 2016
Rahinga: 765KB
3.3.003
Opening - Party Submission/Memo

A Sykes / J Bartlett (Wai 2494), Opening submissions for the Wai 2494 claimants, 25 Jul 16

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

01 Aug 2016
Rahinga: 671KB
Wai 2540
Report

Tū Mai te Rangi! Report on the Crown and Disproportionate Reoffending Rates

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

Tū Mai te Rangi! Report on the Crown and Disproportionate Reoffending Rates, published in June 2017, was the outcome of an urgent inquiry into a claim concerning the Crown’s actions and policies to reduce the high and disproportionate rate of Māori criminal reoffending.

The claim was brought by Tom Hemopo, a retired senior probation officer, who alleged the Crown, through the Department of Corrections, had failed to make a long-term commitment to reducing the high rate of Māori reoffending relative to non-Māori.

The Tribunal heard the claim under urgency at its offices in Wellington from 25 to 29 July 2016. The Tribunal consisted of Judge Patrick Savage, Professor Derek Lardelli, Tania Simpson, and Bill Wilson QC.

Though Tū Mai te Rangi! focused specifically on reoffending, the broader imprisonment statistics for Māori in New Zealand formed the backdrop to the claim. At the time of the hearing, Māori constituted about 15 per cent of the national population but more than 50 per cent of the prison muster. The Tribunal noted the disparity between Māori and non-Māori reoffending rates was substantial and contributed to the disproportionate number of Māori in prison. Because of this, the Tribunal said that, for the Crown to be acting consistently with its obligations, it had to be giving urgent priority to addressing disproportionate Māori reoffending rates in clear and convincing ways.

The Tribunal concluded that the Crown, through the Department of Corrections, was not prioritising the reduction of Māori reoffending. It based this conclusion on the fact that since 2013 the Department of Corrections had had no Māori-specific plan or strategy to reduce Māori reoffending rates, no specific target to reduce Māori reoffending rates, and no specific budget to meet that end. The Tribunal therefore found that these Crown omissions breached the Treaty principles of active protection and equity.

The Tribunal further found that the Crown had not breached the principle of partnership, given that the Department of Corrections was making good-faith attempts to engage with iwi and hapū. However, the Tribunal said the Crown risked breaching its partnership obligations in future if it did not live up to its stated commitment to develop its partnerships with Māori.

Among the Tribunal’s recommendations was that the Department of Corrections revise the Māori Advisory Board’s terms of reference to enhance the board’s influence in high-level discussions with the Department of Corrections concerning the protection of Māori interests. It recommended that the department work with the enhanced board to design and implement a new Māori-specific strategic framework and that it set and commit to a Māori-specific target for the department to reduce Māori reoffending rates. Progress towards this target should, the Tribunal said, be regularly and publically reported on. The Tribunal also said the Crown must include a dedicated budget to appropriately resource the new strategic focus.

As the Tribunal was set to release its report, the Crown sought to submit additional evidence relating to a new Justice Sector target to reduce Māori reoffending, and a proposed Justice Sector strategy to meet this target. The Tribunal allowed the new evidence and reported on it in an addendum to the report. It concluded that this evidence did not alter the report’s findings and conclusions.

 

07 Apr 2017
Rahinga: 1.47MB
28 Feb 2017
Rahinga: 1.38MB
A033(e)
Other Document

Further supplementary evidence of Vincent Patrick Arbuckle (Signed), 15 Mar 17

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

16 Mar 2017
Rahinga: 1.67MB
3.1.058
Pre hearing Represented - Party Submission/Memo

P Andrew / R Smail (Wai 2540), Filing in regards to the further evidence of Vincent Arbuckle (referenced as Wai 2540, #A33(e)), 24 Mar 17

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

30 Mar 2017
Rahinga: 492KB
2.5.0020
Pre hearing - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

Memorandum-directions of the Presiding Officer, concerning additional Crown evidence, 21 Mar 17

Wai 2540, the Department of Corrections and Reoffending Prisoners Claim

21 Mar 2017
Rahinga: 326KB
3.1.001
Pre hearing Represented - Party Submission/Memo

Application for Urgency, 14 September 15

Wai 2541 - the Uenuku Charitable Trust Mandate Strategy Claim

15 Oct 2015
Rahinga: 324KB
1 ... 4741 4742 4743 ... 7733