1. I have considered this Bill for consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. I conclude that several provisions appear to be inconsistent with the affirmed rights, and are not justified under s 5 of the Bill of Rights Act.

2. As required by s 7 of the Bill of Rights Act and Standing Order 261, I draw these apparent inconsistencies to the attention of the house.

2.1 The proposal for a power of arrest in respect of an infringement offence appears to be inconsistent with the right against arbitrary arrest or detention under s 22.

2.2 The obligation to answer questions relating to the conduct of other persons appears to be inconsistent with the right of freedom of expression affirmed by s 14.

2.3 The reversal of the onus of proof in relation to entitlement to buy, receive, consume, procure or possess alcohol or to be on a licensed premises, and proof that a substance found in an alcohol ban area was not alcohol, appear to be inconsistent with the presumption of innocence affirmed in s 25(c).

2.4 The disqualification provisions for appointment as a member of a Licensing Committee or a Licensing Trust appear to be inconsistent with the right against discrimination affirmed by s 19.

2.5 The restriction on judicial review of a decision to remove a licensing trustee appears to be inconsistent with the right to justice affirmed in s 27.

...

Full report (PDF) Report of the Attorney-General under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 on the Alcohol Reform Bill

© Scoop Media