NZ First tried to keep charges quiet

WELLINGTON: New Zealand First tried to gag the Serious Fraud Office from announcing charges in the New Zealand First Foundation case until after next month’s election.

The party applied for court orders to prohibit the SFO from releasing details of the charges, which it revealed yesterday were filed against two defendants with name suppression.

The pair have been charged with obtaining by deception. The charges were filed on September 23.

‘‘The defendants have interim name suppression and so cannot be named or identified at this time,’’ the SFO said.

‘‘We note, however, that neither defendant is a minister, sitting MP, or candidate in the upcoming election (or a member of their staff), or a current member of the New Zealand First party.’’

A High Court judge said the party’s suppression bid was ‘‘not particularly strong’’.

‘‘There is no evidence before me that the [SFO] director’s decision to issue the public statement was influenced by political considerations or that the timeframe she announced for the investigation’s completion was set because of the election.

‘‘I accept there is a risk of confusion and a negative impact on its electoral prospects,’’ Justice Matthew Palmer said.

‘‘However, I consider there is a significant public interest in the New Zealand voting public being informed during an election campaign about criminal charges of serious fraud against people or organisations related to political parties.

‘‘Ultimately, I consider the public interest in transparency outweighs the inconvenience of the announcement to NZ First.’’

The decision, made by the judge last week but only released yesterday evening, also revealed NZ First’s lawyers objected to the SFO ‘‘indexing the timing of the investigation into the foundation to the election’’.

‘‘Based on the public statements made by [SFO director Julie Read] we conclude that: she is expediting the investigation and a prosecution decision so it can be made prior to the general election, but there is no intention by her to complete the Labour Party investigation prior to the general election.

‘‘Contrary to the statement that she is acting consistently, this clearly demonstrates inconsistency of treatment by the director between two political parties being investigated in relation to the same issue,’’ NZ First lawyers Cook Morris Quinn told the SFO in a letter.

In July, the SFO said it had begun an investigation in relation to donations made to the Labour Party in 2017.

It did not reveal when that investigation would conclude.

Ms Read hit back in reply to Cook Morris Quinn.

‘‘We categorically deny that our treatment of the investigation into the New Zealand First Foundation (NZFF) has been different to our treatment of the investigation into Labour Party donations or that it has been motivated by bias,’’ she said.

‘‘The assumptions upon which you proceed in this regard are baseless.

‘‘We note that the NZFF investigation was announced on 18 February 2020 and it was not until 21 April 2020 that a statement was made regarding the timeframe for the completion of the investigation.

‘‘We will be making decisions about the New Zealand First Foundation matter in accordance with our usual processes.’’

NZ First leader Winston Peters would not say yesterday if he knew the two people who had been charged.

He said the timing of the decision to lay charges was ‘‘an appalling intrusion’’.

‘‘The SFO cannot justify the timing of its decision.’’

It was one day before overseas voting started and a few days before advance voting started, he said.

The SFO had acted unreasonably and without justification in the way it conducted the investigation, and NZ First lawyers would seek a High Court declaration that it had abused its statutory powers, Mr Peters said. — The New Zealand Herald

❛ Ultimately, I consider

the public interest in transparency outweighs the

inconvenience of the announcement to NZ First