Our website uses cookies so we can analyse our site usage and give you the best experience. Click "Accept" if you’re happy with this, or click "More" for information about cookies on our site, how to opt out, and how to disable cookies altogether.
On this section of the site, you'll find our publications and guidance materials. You can find different categories of information using the links on the left hand side of this page.
The Border (Customs, Excise and Tariff) Bill provides for the use of automated electronic systems at the border to make decisions, exercise powers, comply with obligations, and take related actions'. Any automated decision making can affect an individual's privacy.
Search and surveillance is a complex area with an immense impact on citizens' rights in relation to the State. Up to now, it has suffered from a lack of consistency and coherence, but the work of the Law Commission and the resulting Search and Surveillance Bill have significantly improved this situation.
Of course, any discussion of search and surveillance gives rise to major privacy issues. By its nature the Bill covers activities that are intrinsically invasive. The Committee is faced with the hard job of balancing genuine law enforcement needs with the public interest in privacy.
In addition, the electronic age we are living in provides far more scope for search and surveillance activities than ever before. It is important that this major piece of legislation is enacted with appropriate safeguards in place to protect all New Zealanders.
Generally, the Bill successfully manages the competing concerns. However, I have recommended several changes to the Bill, to address what appear to be oversights in the drafting. I recognise that search and surveillance is a vital part of law enforcement and enforcement officers should have the tools they need to carry out this role effectively. However, New Zealanders have the right to expect that the intrusions into their private lives created by the Bill will be justifiable and also operated with appropriate safeguards in place.
Introduction; Clause 7 - referral of complaint to overseas privacy enforcement authority; transfer of information outside New Zealand; summary of recommendations
A woman was engaged in an argument with a district council. She spoke to the local newspaper about the dispute, and the newspaper then published an article.
A woman had complained to Police about the actions of a number of people. After Police had decided not to prosecute, the woman wanted to know their reasons.
A man asked a government agency for the information it held about him, particularly legally privileged documents and copies of complaints made about him.