The report, "Who Makes the Law? Reining in the Supreme Court," authored by Roger Partridge, Chair and Senior Fellow at The New Zealand Initiative, examines recent Supreme Court decisions that have sparked widespread concern among legal scholars, practitioners, and politicians.
"The Supreme Court's overreach is making our laws less consistent and predictable, eroding public trust in both the law and the courts." said Partridge.
"When unaccountable judges rewrite clear statutory language or reshape common law principles based on their perception of social values, they're not just interpreting the law – they're making it. This shift risks pushing our Supreme Court down the same path as the US Supreme Court, where judicial activism has led to a troubling politicisation of the judiciary and a dangerous loss of public trust in the courts," Partridge said.
Professor Richard Ekins KC, Professor of Law and Constitutional Government at the University of Oxford, who wrote the foreword to the report, stated, "Roger Partridge's paper is a powerful critique of the Supreme Court's new jurisprudence and sets out an intelligent, thoughtful programme of action that would help to put it right. I commend the New Zealand Initiative for publishing this paper and hope that New Zealand's parliamentarians, who are responsible for maintaining the balance of the constitution, study it closely.”
Key findings of the report include:
"When unaccountable judges rewrite clear statutory language or reshape common law principles based on their perception of social values, they're not just interpreting the law – they're making it. This shift risks pushing our Supreme Court down the same path as the US Supreme Court, where judicial activism has led to a troubling politicisation of the judiciary and a dangerous loss of public trust in the courts," Partridge said.
Professor Richard Ekins KC, Professor of Law and Constitutional Government at the University of Oxford, who wrote the foreword to the report, stated, "Roger Partridge's paper is a powerful critique of the Supreme Court's new jurisprudence and sets out an intelligent, thoughtful programme of action that would help to put it right. I commend the New Zealand Initiative for publishing this paper and hope that New Zealand's parliamentarians, who are responsible for maintaining the balance of the constitution, study it closely.”
Key findings of the report include:
- The Supreme Court has adopted a loose approach to interpreting laws passed by Parliament, often stretching or ignoring clear statutory language.
- Judges are reshaping common law principles based on their perceptions of changing social values, despite lacking democratic accountability for such policy decisions.
- This judicial overreach is making laws more uncertain and unpredictable, undermining the rule of law and the sovereignty of Parliament.
More clearly defined statutory guardrails to stop the courts from straying beyond their proper role.
Improving judicial appointment processes to emphasise the need for judicial restraint and respect for parliamentary sovereignty.
Click here to download the two-page summary of Who Makes the Law? Reining in the Supreme Court
Roger Partridge discussed his report with Jack Hodder KC and Dr Oliver Hartwich on our webinar launch of the report. Watch below:
Roger Partridge is chairman and a co-founder of The New Zealand Initiative and is a senior member of its research team. He led law firm Bell Gully as executive chairman from 2007 to 2014. This article was first published HERE
5 comments:
Essential to settle this issue very fast. The stealth strategy is doing huge damage. When will NZers wake up?
They must be reined in before they reign! Come on coalition, get on with the job, we'll love you for it.
Group-think was never a problem when we had the Privy Council. With our very own SC it will always be an issue. The very narrow, inbred group that contributes its members to the SC will always see themselves as a superior form of humanity to the rest of us. Houston, we have a problem!
yes we need an independent body like the Privy Council back again. As one commentator has pointed out our Supreme Court is "inbred" as in we don't have a wide selection to choose from. However if they did their job and left their social views at the door, they could be ok
The importation by judicial activists of tikanga into the common law completely undermines the integrity of the Common Law.
The rule of law requires that the law is certain, known in advance, and applies equally to everyone.
These liberal know-betters want to set rule by unelected black robes above rule by elected Parliamentary representatives.
With lifetime judicial appointments, we can’t get rid of them, so Parliament needs to bash the judiciary back to their proper Constitutional role.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.