New Zealand Parliament Passes Controversial Three-Strikes Sentencing Bill

Wellington, October 26, 2023 — The House of Representatives has passed the Sentencing (Reinstating Three Strikes) Amendment Bill in a pivotal vote that underscores ongoing debates over criminal justice reform. This legislation aims to reintroduce a three-strikes sentencing regime for repeat offenders of serious crimes, signaling a shift toward more stringent punitive measures.

A Divided Parliament

The third reading of the bill was marked by impassioned speeches from both supporters and critics, illustrating deep divisions on how best to ensure public safety. Proponents, led by Associate Minister of Justice Hon Nicole McKee, emphasized that reinstating the three-strikes law is crucial for restoring public confidence in New Zealand's justice system. They argue it will deter repeat offenders and reduce violent crime rates over time, with a goal of achieving 20,000 fewer victims of violent crime by 2029.

Opponents, including Dr Duncan Webb from Labour and Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan from the Green Party, contended that the bill would not effectively lower crime rates and might increase incarceration numbers without addressing root causes of criminal behavior. Critics highlighted concerns about disproportionate impacts on Māori communities, pointing to systemic biases in New Zealand's justice system.

Judicial Discretion and Human Rights Concerns

Critics also raised issues regarding the potential limitations on judicial discretion imposed by this legislation. Dr Ginny Andersen from Labour noted that judges should have the ability to tailor sentences based on individual circumstances rather than being bound by a rigid three-strikes rule. Arena Williams, another Labour representative, emphasized concerns about compliance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, arguing it could lead to disproportionately severe penalties without adequate judicial oversight.

Evidence and Effectiveness Debate

The debate extended into discussions about the evidence supporting the effectiveness of such laws. Critics like Arena Williams pointed out a lack of empirical data showing that three-strike regimes reduce crime rates effectively. They referenced studies from other jurisdictions, such as California, which indicated minimal deterrence effects for serious offenses. Meanwhile, supporters cited historical precedence and support from groups like the Sensible Sentencing Trust to justify the bill's reinstatement, arguing it would bolster public confidence in justice.

Voting Outcome

The vote concluded with 68 members supporting the bill and 43 opposing it:

• Ayes (68): New Zealand National (49), ACT New Zealand (11), New Zealand First (8)
• Noes (43): New Zealand Labour (22), Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand (15), Te Pāti Māori (6)

The motion was agreed upon, and the bill proceeded to its third reading.

Procedural Observations

During the voting process, there was a call for maintaining silence to ensure accurate vote counting by the Clerk. This highlights the importance of procedural integrity in legislative decision-making.