This is edition 2025/14 of the Ten@10 newsletter.
Welcome back. It's 2025 and 20 years since I started writing about politics and anything else that took my fancy. Thank to my VIP members for making this site what it is today. In July we will be having a 20th birthday celebration. Stay tuned for more announcements.
This is the Ten@10, where I collate and summarise ten news items you generally won't see in the mainstream media.
Enjoy!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/67394/6739418da49fc37a1dcf2c2a1f2798ba9a766d3e" alt=""
1. The Debate Continues
David Harvey
- 📜 "The Debate" Continues: The article follows up on a previous commentary, offering an "answer" to Mr. Partridge's response and raising the point that the law must be adaptable when Parliament remains silent.
- ⚖️ Judicial Role in Gaps: The piece emphasizes the Judiciary’s responsibility to address legal gaps, particularly in the absence of legislative action, by applying existing laws to current societal needs.
- 💻 Example of Judicial Interpretation: The author discusses the Garrett case, where the Courts adapted an old definition of "documents" to include digital artefacts, illustrating the need for law to evolve with technology.
- 🖥️ Computer Crimes Legislation: The delay in enacting computer crime laws contrasts the agility of the judiciary, which found ways to prosecute offenders using existing legal frameworks.
- 🏛️ Challenges with Statutory Interpretation: The author critiques proposed amendments to the Legislation Act, arguing they could hinder judicial independence and adaptability, especially in the context of rapid technological change.
- ⚖️ The Need for Judicial Flexibility: The article stresses that when the legislature is slow or silent, Courts must fill the gaps, particularly in cases like breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, without waiting for legislation.
- 🏛️ Parliamentary Sovereignty vs. Judicial Independence: Partridge's position on parliamentary supremacy is challenged, with the author asserting that judicial intervention is sometimes necessary when Parliament fails to act.
- 💡 Judicial Innovation: The article praises judicial creativity, particularly in developing restorative justice and therapeutic court systems, which were initially driven by judges before legislative action caught up.
- 👩⚖️ Innovative Judges: The work of judges like Fred McElrea and Heemi Taumanu in adapting court processes to meet community needs is highlighted as an example of the judiciary’s proactive role in addressing social issues.
- ⚖️ Final Thoughts on Judicial Activism: While agreeing with Partridge on some points, the author concludes that a strong, independent judiciary is essential for upholding the rule of law, despite occasional judicial overreach.