Second Review of the Evidence Act 2006 Te Arotake Tuarua i te Evidence Act 2006

256 Pages·2017·1.17 MB·English

i
March 2018
Wellington, New Zealand
Issues Paper | He Puka Kaupapa 42
Second Review of the
Evidence Act 2006
Te Arotake Tuarua i
te Evidence Act 2006
ii
The Law Commission | Te Aka Matua o te Ture is an independent, publicly
funded, central advisory body established by statute to undertake the
systematic review, reform and development of the law of New Zealand.
its purpose is to help achieve law that is just, principled, and accessible,
and that reflects the heritage and aspirations of the people of New
Zealand.
The Commissioners are:
The Hon Sir Douglas White — President
Donna Buckingham
Belinda Clark QSO
Helen McQueen
The General Manager of the Law Commission is Susan Peacock
The office of the Law Commission is at:
Level 19, 171 Featherston Street, Wellington
Postal address: PO Box 2590, Wellington 6140, New Zealand
Document Exchange Number: sp 23534
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [email protected]
internet: www.lawcom.govt.nz
The Māori language version of this issues Paper’s title was developed for
the Commission by Kiwa Hammond.
A catalogue record for this title is available from the National Library
of New Zealand. Kei te pātengi raraunga o Te Puna Mātauranga o
Aotearoa te whakarārangi o tēnei pukapuka.
iSBN: 978-1-877569-84-5 (Online)
iSSN: 1177-7877 (Online)
This title may be cited as NZLC iP42
This title is available on the internet at the Law Commission's website
www.lawcom.govt.nz
Copyright©2018 New Zealand Law Commission.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 international licence. in essence,
you are free to copy, distribute and adapt the
work, as long as you attribute the work to the Law
Commission and abide by other licence terms. To view a copy of this
licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
iii FOrEWOrD
Foreword
The Evidence Act 2006 contains the rules that govern the admissibility of evidence in criminal and civil
court proceedings and often in tribunal hearings as well. The law of evidence plays a critical function in
the justice system. Opposing parties present evidence to a judge (where the judge is sitting alone) or jury
(if the judge is sitting with a jury). The judge or jury must first decide what the facts are by assessing the
evidence. Once the facts are found, the relevant law is applied.
The rules of evidence govern who may say what and how in court proceedings and also what documents
and material items may be presented. The rules of evidence are therefore crucial to the fair, just and
expeditious determination of all proceedings and are an integral part of the rule of law. They may be
described as the oil in the machinery of the justice system.
When Parliament, acting on the advice of the Law Commission, enacted the Evidence Act 2006, it
substantially, though not completely, codified the rules of evidence in one accessible statute. Because
this was a relatively radical move, Parliament also decided the Commission should review the operation
of the new statute every five years to make sure it was working well in practice.
This is the Commission’s second review of the Act. We have two years in which to complete the review
and this allows us to publish this issues Paper and consult widely on how the rules in the Evidence Act are
operating in practice.
Following its first review in 2013, the Commission concluded the Act was working in a generally satisfactory
manner. Our preliminary view is that broadly speaking the Act is still working well. At the same time,
however, we have identified a number of issues that warrant consideration and possible amendment.
This issues Paper summarises the issues that arise and explores possible options for reform. We now
seek submissions and comments from all interested parties. in approaching its original review of the law
of evidence, the Commission was cognisant of the significance of te ao Māori. We remain committed to
recognising any specific issues affecting Māori in this context and welcome submissions in that regard.
The feedback we receive will be taken into account by the Commission in making its recommendations to
the Government in our final report, which must be delivered in February 2019.
Douglas White
President
iv
Call for submissions
Submissions or comments (formal or informal) on this issues Paper should be received by 15 June 2018.
Emailed submissions should be sent to:
[email protected]
Written submissions should be sent to:
Second Review of the Evidence Act
Law Commission
PO Box 2590
Wellington 6140
DX SP 23534
The Law Commission asks for any submissions or comments on this issues Paper on the second review
of the Evidence Act 2006. Submitters are invited to focus on any of the questions. it is certainly not
expected that each submitter will answer every question.
The submission can be set out in any format, but it is helpful to specify the number of the question that
you are discussing.
OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982
The Law Commission’s processes are essentially public, and it is subject to the Official information Act
1982. Thus, copies of submissions made to the Commission will normally be made available on request
and may be published on the Commission’s website. The Commission may refer to submissions in its
reports. Any requests for withholding of information on grounds of confidentiality or for any other reason
will be determined in accordance with the Official information Act 1982.
1 CONTENTS
Contents
Foreword iii
Call for submissions iv
Executive summary 4
List of questions 20
Chapter 1 — Introduction 28
Background .................................................................................................................................................................................28
The 2013 review .........................................................................................................................................................................29
The second review ....................................................................................................................................................................29
The nature and scope of our review ...................................................................................................................................31
The purpose provision .............................................................................................................................................................32
Assessing any potential amendment to the Act ............................................................................................................35
review of section 202 .............................................................................................................................................................35
Matters we are not going to address .................................................................................................................................36
Structure of this paper............................................................................................................................................................40
Chapter 2 — Te ao Māori and the Evidence Act 41
Background ..................................................................................................................................................................................41
Te ao Māori and the development of the Evidence Code .........................................................................................42
The Evidence Act: 10 years later.........................................................................................................................................49
Chapter 3 — Evidence of sexual experience 52
Background .................................................................................................................................................................................52
issues for consideration ..........................................................................................................................................................54
Sexual disposition evidence ..................................................................................................................................................54
Complainant’s sexual experience with the defendant ................................................................................................60
False or allegedly false prior complaints ...........................................................................................................................62
Extension of section 44 to civil proceedings ...................................................................................................................66
Notice requirement in section 44A .....................................................................................................................................67
Chapter 4 — Conviction evidence 69
Background .................................................................................................................................................................................69
Law Commission’s 2013 review of the Act ......................................................................................................................70
issues for consideration ...........................................................................................................................................................71
relationship between sections 8 and 49 ..........................................................................................................................72
Exceptional circumstances .....................................................................................................................................................74
The evidential effect of the conviction once the exceptional circumstances test is satisfied ......................76
A presumptive proof rule? .....................................................................................................................................................78
Chapter 5 — Right to silence 80
Background ................................................................................................................................................................................80
issues for consideration ..........................................................................................................................................................86
2 CONTENTS
Distinction between drawing adverse inferences and inferring guilt ......................................................................86
Additional issues .........................................................................................................................................................................91
Chapter 6 — Unreliable statements 97
Background .................................................................................................................................................................................97
Law Commission’s 2013 review of the Act ......................................................................................................................101
relevance of truth ...................................................................................................................................................................102
Chapter 7 — Improperly obtained evidence 110
Background ................................................................................................................................................................................110
Law Commission’s 2013 review of the Act ......................................................................................................................113
issues for consideration .........................................................................................................................................................114
Section 30(3) factors ...............................................................................................................................................................115
Use of previously excluded evidence in a subsequent proceeding .....................................................................123
Addressing concerns associated with evidence gathered during undercover operations ...........................131
Chapter 8 — Identification evidence 138
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................138
Law Commission’s 2013 review of the Act .....................................................................................................................140
issues for consideration .........................................................................................................................................................141
The definition of “visual identification evidence” .........................................................................................................142
relationship between identification evidence and hearsay provisions ...............................................................147
Chapter 9 — Giving evidence in sexual and family violence cases 150
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................150
issues for consideration .........................................................................................................................................................151
Overseas approaches to pre-recorded evidence .......................................................................................................152
Complainants in sexual violence cases ............................................................................................................................155
Complainants in family violence cases .............................................................................................................................157
Other witnesses in sexual and family violence cases .................................................................................................165
Other vulnerable witnesses .................................................................................................................................................165
video recording evidence for use at re-trial .................................................................................................................166
Access to evidential video interviews ..............................................................................................................................168
Judicial control over witness questioning .......................................................................................................................169
Chapter 10 — Conduct of experts 176
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................176
issues for consideration ........................................................................................................................................................177
Should experts in criminal proceedings be subject to a code of conduct? .......................................................178
Obligation to confer ................................................................................................................................................................179
Clarifying the consequences if expert witnesses fail to comply with the Civil Code .......................................181
Chapter 11 — Counterintuitive evidence in sexual and family violence cases 184
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................184
issues for consideration ........................................................................................................................................................188
Agreed statements for counterintuitive evidence .......................................................................................................188
Judicial directions on counterintuitive evidence ..........................................................................................................190
3 CONTENTS
Chapter 12 — Judicial directions on the impact of significant delay 194
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................194
issues for consideration ........................................................................................................................................................195
Legislative history of section 122(2)(e) ............................................................................................................................197
The operation of section 122(2)(e) ..................................................................................................................................200
Should section 122(2)(e) be amended? ...........................................................................................................................201
Chapter 13 — Veracity evidence 208
Background ..............................................................................................................................................................................208
Law Commission’s 2010 advice to the Minister of Justice ........................................................................................211
Law Commission’s 2013 review of the Act ......................................................................................................................211
Hannigan v R ..............................................................................................................................................................................212
issues for consideration ........................................................................................................................................................213
redundant provisions? ..........................................................................................................................................................213
The section 38(2)(a) trigger .................................................................................................................................................216
“veracity” and its definition .................................................................................................................................................217
Chapter 14 — Co-defendants’ statements 219
Background ...............................................................................................................................................................................219
Admissibility of non-hearsay statements? ....................................................................................................................222
Chapter 15 — Privilege 227
Background ..............................................................................................................................................................................227
Extension of legal advice privilege to third party communications......................................................................227
Termination of privilege .......................................................................................................................................................230
Chapter 16 — Regulations 236
Background ..............................................................................................................................................................................236
issues for consideration .......................................................................................................................................................237
Developments in recording technology .........................................................................................................................237
Pre-recording the evidence of complainants ...............................................................................................................240
Security and use of transcripts ...........................................................................................................................................241
Defence counsel access to video records ....................................................................................................................243
Military proceedings ..............................................................................................................................................................243
Appendix 1 — Terms of reference 245
Appendix 2 — Code of Conduct for expert witnesses (Schedule 4, High Court Rules 2016) 247
Appendix 3 — Practice Note – Police Questioning (s 30(6) of the Evidence Act 2006)
[2007] 3 NZLR 297 249
Appendix 4 — Jury direction on delay 250
4 ExECUTivE SUMMAry
Executive summary
INTRODUCTION
1 The Evidence Act 2006 is based on the Evidence Code, which the Law Commission published in
1999. The Act transformed the law of evidence in New Zealand by bringing together in one statute
most of the previous relevant statutory provisions as well as the relevant common law rules of
evidence. Section 202 of the Act requires the Commission to undertake five yearly reviews of the
operation of the Act. This is the second review of the Act and it must be completed by February
2019.
2 Generally speaking, the transformation of the law of evidence into the one Act has been considered
a success. When the Commission completed its first review in 2013, it reported that the Act was
generally working well and there was widespread acceptance of the value of codification of the
law in this area.
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION
3 This second review, like the previous one, is governed principally by section 202(1) of the Act, which
places emphasis on the “operation” of the provisions. it is not a first principles review intended
to revisit the Act’s fundamental policy settings. However, under paragraph 4 of the terms of
reference (attached as Appendix 1) the Commission is required, on this occasion, to extend its
review to consider some policy matters. These stem from the Commission’s 2015 report, The Justice
Response to Victims of Sexual Violence, in which the Commission reported to the Government that
some of the rules of evidence relating to sexual and family violence were potentially problematic
and should be reviewed. Our terms of reference now require us to undertake that review.
4 Under section 202 we must consider whether the Act’s provisions should be retained or repealed;
and if they should be retained, whether amendments are “necessary or desirable”. in considering
whether a particular amendment meets the test of necessity or desirability, we intend to use the six
“limbs” of the Act’s purpose provision (in section 6) as a principled check list. The purpose of the
Act is to help secure the just determination of proceedings by:
.
the application of logical rules;
.
recognising the importance of the rights affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of rights Act 1990;
.
promoting fairness;
.
protecting confidentiality and other important public interests;
.
avoiding unjustifiable expense and delay; and
.
enhancing access to the law of evidence.
5 Any possible reform that is not consistent with, or does not implement, this purpose will not meet
the statutory test of “necessary or desirable”. Minor amendments that merely tinker with a provision
will also not meet the threshold.
5 ExECUTivE SUMMAry
Is there a need for a review every five years?
6 Our terms of reference require us to consider whether section 202 ought to be retained. relevant
considerations include the likelihood of further problems arising with the interpretation and
application of the Act’s provisions in practice and the impact of periodic reviews on the Commission’s
resources. We are also considering (if the requirement for regular reviews is retained) whether the
reviews should:
.
continue to be at five yearly intervals;
.
be limited in scope to the operation of the Act’s provisions; and
.
be conducted by the Commission, rather than the Ministry of Justice (the administering
department).
CHAPTER 2 – TE AO MĀORI AND THE EVIDENCE ACT
7 Te Tiriti o Waitangi (The Treaty of Waitangi) is of vital constitutional importance as “part of
the fabric of New Zealand society”1 and plays an important part in the Government process for
developing policy and legislation. There has also been growing recognition of te ao Māori (the
Māori dimension) and tikanga Māori (Māori customary law) and the need to address how tikanga
may operate within and alongside the law.
8 When developing the Evidence Code, the Commission endeavoured to take te ao Māori into
account. A number of provisions in the Code and the subsequent Act were crafted to address issues
and problems that had arisen at common law over the admission of oral evidence on Māori custom
(for example, the general test for the admissibility of hearsay evidence and the rules on opinion
and expert evidence). Consideration was also given to whether the privilege and confidentiality
provisions adequately addressed communications with kaumātua (elders), tohunga (experts) and
rongoā (traditional Māori medicine) practitioners.
9 it is now over 10 years since the Act came into force and nearly 20 years since the development of
the underpinning Code. However, there is surprisingly little case law relating to the Act and te ao
Māori and this makes it difficult to draw any conclusions about how well the provisions of the Act
are recognising Māori interests.
10 We are therefore seeking feedback and submissions on whether any particular issues have arisen
for Māori in relation to the Act, and if so, whether any amendments are necessary or desirable to
better recognise te ao Māori.
CHAPTER 3 – EVIDENCE OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE
11 Section 44 of the Act is known as the “rape shield” provision. it applies in sexual cases to restrict
the extent to which complainants may be questioned about their previous sexual experience. rape
shield provisions protect complainants from unnecessarily intrusive questions focused on their
sexual history. Such evidence has little probative value and causes many complainants to feel they
are on trial.
1 Huakina Development Trust v Waikato Valley Authority [1987] 2 NZLr 188 (HC) at 210.
6 ExECUTivE SUMMAry
12 A number of important issues relating to the rape shield provision are being considered in this
review.
Sexual disposition evidence
13 Section 44 precludes reference to a complainant’s “sexual experience … with any person other
than the defendant” unless the judge grants leave, and absolutely prohibits reference to the
complainant’s “reputation … in sexual matters”. Section 44 makes no mention of evidence of a
complainant’s general disposition in sexual matters (unlike its predecessor section 23A of the
Evidence Act 1908) – an example of this type of evidence is a recording of sexual fantasies in a
personal diary. This has created some uncertainty about the admissibility of such evidence.
14 in B (SC12/2013) v R,2 the Supreme Court considered section 44’s application to evidence of a
complainant’s sexual disposition was ambiguous. The majority said the Act’s distinction between
evidence of “sexual experience” in section 40(3)(b) and “sexual experience … with any person” in
section 44(1) potentially created a gap, as evidence relating to a complainant’s sexual disposition
could arguably fall within the former subsection but not the latter. The majority concluded that
section 44 needs further legislative clarification.
15 We think it would be desirable to amend section 44 to clarify the admissibility of sexual disposition
evidence. Our preliminary view is that all evidence relating to the complainant’s propensity in sexual
matters should be captured by section 44. The policy of the provision is to provide protection for
complainants and to prevent erroneous assumptions being drawn from the complainant’s sexual
history.
16 if the Act is amended to clarify that sexual disposition evidence falls within the scope of section 44,
then a decision must be made as to which admissibility rule should apply to this evidence. We
are seeking feedback on whether sexual disposition evidence should always be inadmissible, or
admissible with the permission of the judge subject to meeting the heightened relevance test in
section 44(3).
Extension of section 44 to cover sexual experience with the defendant
17 Section 44 does not apply to evidence of the complainant’s previous sexual experience with the
defendant. New Zealand is one of the few jurisdictions where evidence of the complainant’s sexual
history with the defendant is admissible, even if it can be objected to.
18 The extension of the rape shield to include the complainant’s sexual history with the defendant
has been a contentious matter in the past, with different views being taken over the perceived
relevance of such evidence. Those in favour of extending the rape shield argue that evidence
of previous sexual experience between the complainant and defendant should not lead to an
implication that the complainant is more likely to agree to sexual activity on another occasion.
Those opposed to the extension argue that the existence of a prior sexual relationship between
the complainant and the defendant will often be, or inevitably is, relevant to the issue of consent
or reasonable belief in consent.
19 Given it is now 21 years since the Commission consulted the public on the ambit of the rape shield,
and over 10 years since the current settings were enacted by Parliament, we think it is timely to seek
views on whether the rape shield should now be extended to cover evidence of the complainant’s
2 B (SC12/2013) v R [2013] NZSC 151, [2014] 1 NZLr 261.