Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
License needed for work use Register

Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 

Supreme Court – Appeal of Right to Life

16 March 2012

Media Release

Supreme Court – Appeal of Right to Life

The Supreme Court heard the appeal of Right to Life on the judgment of the Court of Appeal on the 13th March 2012. The matter was the Judicial Review of the Performance of the Abortion Supervisory Committee. The Court comprised the Right Hon Justice Sian Elias, presiding, the Hon Justices Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Young. These proceedings commenced in the High Court in Wellington in May 2005.

Leave to appeal was granted in a judgment of the Court dated 26 August
2011 on the following grounds:
(a) Whether the respondent Committee’s functions under ss 14(1)(a),(i) and (k) and 36 of the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977 empower it to review or scrutinise the decisions of certifying consultants and form its own view about the lawfulness of their decisions to the extent necessary to perform its functions.

(b) If so, whether there is any evidential foundation for the High Court’s finding that “the approved rates [for abortions] seems remarkably high, bearing in mind that under s 187(A) [of the Crimes Act 1961] the consultants must form a good faith opinion that continuance of the pregnancy would result in serious danger to the mother’s health”.

(c) Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to consider whether certifying consultants are obeying the “abortion law” (as defined) and, if so, whether there is any evidential foundation for the High Court’s finding that “there is reason to doubt the lawfulness of many abortions authorised by certifying consultants”.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

Should the Supreme Court accept the submission of Right to Life and find that the Abortion Supervisory Committee has a statutory duty and the powers to hold certifying consultants accountable for the abortions that they authorise, it should result in certifying consultants being required to justify to the Committee the authorisation of the 98 per cent of abortions on mental health grounds.

Judgment was reserved by the Court and is expected to be delivered within three months.

The counsel for Right to Life were Peter Mckenzie QC, Dr Ian Bassett and Miss Rachel Chan. The counsel for the Abortion Supervisory Committee were Ms Cheryl Gwyn and Ms W.Aldred of the Crown Law Office.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,

© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

Gordon Campbell: On The Government’s Smokefree Laws Debacle

The most charitable explanation for National’s behaviour over the smokefree legislation is that they have dutifully fulfilled the wishes of the Big Tobacco lobby and then cast around for excuses that might sell this health policy U-turn to the public. The less charitable view is that the government was being deliberately misleading. Are we to think Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is a fool or a liar? It seems rather early on in his term of office to be facing that unpleasant choice... More


 
 
Public Housing Futures: Christmas Comes Early For Landlords

New CTU analysis of the National & ACT coalition agreement has shown the cost of returning interest deductibility to landlords is an extra $900M on top of National’s original proposal. This is because it is going to be implemented earlier and faster, including retrospective rebates from April 2023. More


Green Party: Petition To Save Oil & Gas Ban

“The new Government’s plan to expand oil and gas exploration is as dangerous as it is unscientific. Whatever you think about the new government, there is simply no mandate to trash the climate. We need to come together to stop them,” says James Shaw. More

PSA: MFAT Must Reverse Decision To Remove Te Reo

MFAT's decision to remove te reo from correspondence before new Ministers are sworn in risks undermining the important progress the public sector has made in honouring te Tiriti. "We are very disappointed in what is a backward decision - it simply seems to be a Ministry bowing to the racist rhetoric we heard on the election campaign trail," says Marcia Puru. More

 
 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

InfoPages News Channels


 
 
 
 

Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.