New Zealand prides itself on being a secular society, notwithstanding the prayer said at the beginning of each day in Parliament, references to God in the national anthem and two Christian holidays, Good Friday and Christmas Day, being days when most shops are required to close.
But who knew that election campaigning is prohibited in churches?
Not the PoO team, we must confess.
One reason for the prohibition is that most churches are registered charities, which are required to remain politically neutral.
A church therefore cannot promote or oppose a particular political party or candidate. This includes endorsing a candidate on social media, making a donation to an election campaign, and allowing a political candidate to use the church’s resources for campaigning purposes without compensation.
But there’s another reason: a provision of the Electoral Act 1993 makes it a corrupt practice to use “spiritual influence” to induce someone to vote in a certain way.
This law is designed to prevent faith leaders or political figures from exploiting their positions of spiritual authority to pressure voters.
People attending religious services accordingly are safeguarded against political coercion in a place where they may feel particularly vulnerable to authority figures.
This suggests a pastor’s flock is easily led – or misled.
Did the law-makers ever try their hand at rounding up sheep?
But whoa.
Spiritual authority figures aren’t found only in churches. Among other places, they are found on marae.
Should the law be changed to remove this example of Māori political privilege and ensure that voters on marae are protected against spiritual influence, too?
That question was triggered by Andrea Vance’s report that Auckland electoral authorities have referred a complaint to police regarding alleged campaigning by Labour Party candidates in Pacific churches during the local body elections.
The complaint cited the rules against using spiritual influence and the political neutrality requirements for charities.
Vance reported:
Auckland’s electoral authorities have referred a complaint to police over allegations that Labour Party candidates campaigned inside Pacific churches during this month’s local elections.
The new complaint – now the second police inquiry arising from this year’s local elections – comes amid an increasingly fraught political environment in South Auckland, with rival tickets trading allegations of electoral impropriety.
The anonymous claims, lodged with Auckland Council’s Electoral Office, detail a pattern of Sunday services across the Manukau Ward and alleges Labour councillors and local board candidates addressed congregations from the pulpit, displayed “Vote Labour” banners, and in some cases presented envelopes during offering segments.
The services included those at EFKS Magele i Sisifo, in Māngere and Ōtāhuhu EFKS – both branches of the Congregational Christian Church of Samoa – and Tuingapapai Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga New Zealand in Otahuhu.
Social media posts show candidates, including Otara-Papatoetoe local board member Vi Hausia, speaking to congregations while holding voting papers.
Election Services managing director and principal electoral officer Dale Ofsoske referred the matter to police.
Vance noted the provision of the Electoral Act which makes it a corrupt practice to exert “spiritual influence” to induce a person to vote a certain way.
While the clause is rarely invoked and there are no known modern prosecutions, it was designed to prevent faith leaders or political figures using religion to pressure voters.
Churches that are registered charities are required to remain politically neutral. Under Charities Services’ guidance, they are restricted in the political activities they can engage in, and must not support political parties or candidates.
Election Services business manager Craig Taylor confirmed to Vance that a complaint had been received from a member of the public “regarding the conduct of candidate(s) at a number of churches in the Manukau Ward, involving the influencing of voters.”
But if church-goers need the law’s protection, shouldn’t people gathered on marae be similarly safeguarded against the inveigling of vote-seeking political campaigners,
Marae are Māori communal meeting grounds, considered wāhi tapu (sacred places) where important ceremonies are held and where a connection to ancestors, history, and spiritual realms is maintained.
The Maori Party launched national election campaigns on an Auckland marae in June 2020 and a Henderson marae in July 2023.
Marae are tied to party candidate selections and during the recent Tāmaki Makaurau by-election, Oriini Kaipara’s upbringing at Hoani Waititi Marae was highlighted as key to her whakapapa (genealogy) and campaign narrative.
Police and other agencies launched inquiries in June 2024 after a group of former marae workers claimed private Census data had been misused to help the Māori Party’s election campaign.
A police spokesperson subsequently said they had “found insufficient evidence to establish criminal culpability for corruption”.
The investigation and publicity surrounding it nevertheless drew attention to the place of marae in election campaigning.
Shouldn’t Maori be hollering for the same protections against political proselytism on their spiritual meeting grounds that are provided for church-goers?
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
One reason for the prohibition is that most churches are registered charities, which are required to remain politically neutral.
A church therefore cannot promote or oppose a particular political party or candidate. This includes endorsing a candidate on social media, making a donation to an election campaign, and allowing a political candidate to use the church’s resources for campaigning purposes without compensation.
But there’s another reason: a provision of the Electoral Act 1993 makes it a corrupt practice to use “spiritual influence” to induce someone to vote in a certain way.
This law is designed to prevent faith leaders or political figures from exploiting their positions of spiritual authority to pressure voters.
People attending religious services accordingly are safeguarded against political coercion in a place where they may feel particularly vulnerable to authority figures.
This suggests a pastor’s flock is easily led – or misled.
Did the law-makers ever try their hand at rounding up sheep?
But whoa.
Spiritual authority figures aren’t found only in churches. Among other places, they are found on marae.
Should the law be changed to remove this example of Māori political privilege and ensure that voters on marae are protected against spiritual influence, too?
That question was triggered by Andrea Vance’s report that Auckland electoral authorities have referred a complaint to police regarding alleged campaigning by Labour Party candidates in Pacific churches during the local body elections.
The complaint cited the rules against using spiritual influence and the political neutrality requirements for charities.
Vance reported:
Auckland’s electoral authorities have referred a complaint to police over allegations that Labour Party candidates campaigned inside Pacific churches during this month’s local elections.
The new complaint – now the second police inquiry arising from this year’s local elections – comes amid an increasingly fraught political environment in South Auckland, with rival tickets trading allegations of electoral impropriety.
The anonymous claims, lodged with Auckland Council’s Electoral Office, detail a pattern of Sunday services across the Manukau Ward and alleges Labour councillors and local board candidates addressed congregations from the pulpit, displayed “Vote Labour” banners, and in some cases presented envelopes during offering segments.
The services included those at EFKS Magele i Sisifo, in Māngere and Ōtāhuhu EFKS – both branches of the Congregational Christian Church of Samoa – and Tuingapapai Free Wesleyan Church of Tonga New Zealand in Otahuhu.
Social media posts show candidates, including Otara-Papatoetoe local board member Vi Hausia, speaking to congregations while holding voting papers.
Election Services managing director and principal electoral officer Dale Ofsoske referred the matter to police.
Vance noted the provision of the Electoral Act which makes it a corrupt practice to exert “spiritual influence” to induce a person to vote a certain way.
While the clause is rarely invoked and there are no known modern prosecutions, it was designed to prevent faith leaders or political figures using religion to pressure voters.
Churches that are registered charities are required to remain politically neutral. Under Charities Services’ guidance, they are restricted in the political activities they can engage in, and must not support political parties or candidates.
Election Services business manager Craig Taylor confirmed to Vance that a complaint had been received from a member of the public “regarding the conduct of candidate(s) at a number of churches in the Manukau Ward, involving the influencing of voters.”
But if church-goers need the law’s protection, shouldn’t people gathered on marae be similarly safeguarded against the inveigling of vote-seeking political campaigners,
Marae are Māori communal meeting grounds, considered wāhi tapu (sacred places) where important ceremonies are held and where a connection to ancestors, history, and spiritual realms is maintained.
The Maori Party launched national election campaigns on an Auckland marae in June 2020 and a Henderson marae in July 2023.
Marae are tied to party candidate selections and during the recent Tāmaki Makaurau by-election, Oriini Kaipara’s upbringing at Hoani Waititi Marae was highlighted as key to her whakapapa (genealogy) and campaign narrative.
Police and other agencies launched inquiries in June 2024 after a group of former marae workers claimed private Census data had been misused to help the Māori Party’s election campaign.
A police spokesperson subsequently said they had “found insufficient evidence to establish criminal culpability for corruption”.
The investigation and publicity surrounding it nevertheless drew attention to the place of marae in election campaigning.
Shouldn’t Maori be hollering for the same protections against political proselytism on their spiritual meeting grounds that are provided for church-goers?
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
No comments:
Post a Comment