Chris Finlayson says he is not a “crypto-fascist” stealthily imposing “secret courts.”

Chris Finlayson is in full ‘explaining is losing mode’.

But he?says he is not a “crypto-fascist” stealthily imposing “secret courts.”

Note how careful he was not to mention anything about being a shape-shifting lizard man though…very careful.

Security services minister Chris Finlayson says he is not a “crypto-fascist” stealthily imposing “secret courts.”

A last-minute change to new health and safety laws would have allowed hearings behind closed doors to protect national security. The Law Society said the Crown could introduce evidence which could be withheld from a defendant or their lawyers.

Finlayson – who is also the Attorney-General – says the amendment was scrapped a week ago. And he doesn’t like the term “secret courts” describing it as “hyperbolic.”

But although the Law Society were commenting on an old version of the legislation, it appears their original fears still stand.

Finlayson told reporters: “I saw some article in the Dominion Post that suggested I was some sort of crypto-fascist behind this particular secret court. But it was nothing of the sort. ??

“It was a [Supplementary Order Paper] that was introduced to deal with the circumstances in which you would deal with a hearing behind closed doors. Where did the [Law Society] ?go wrong? Well, probably, what they did is that they didn’t really understand the legislative history and hadn’t picked up on the most recent SOP.”

The bill – which is progressing through committee stages at Parliament – now makes clear that all parties should have access to classified evidence relevant to proceedings.

But it also allows a court to exclude “any person” from the hearing, or to appoint a special advocate with security clearance to view classified evidence on a defendant’s behalf.

The Law Society won’t comment further until it has received the new SOP.

This is probably the result of arrogance and poor communication about the bill…and tinfoil hat wearing drop kicks on the left.

Finlayson defended last minute changes to the legislation, relating to the security services.

“Sometimes issues do arise at the 11th hour,” he said. “Did it justify actually turning it back to the select committee for a hearing? The answer is no. In the overall scheme of things it’s a very small corner of the legislation, that’s just the way in which you deal with the issue of classified information.”

He says there is “nothing surprising or sinister in any of this.” And he argues current laws don’t clearly set out how security information should be dealt with in the courts.

Yeah, but you wouldn’t be in ‘explaining is losing’ mode if you’d signaled that properly.

Why is it the stuff ups are all coming from the Catholic mafia at the moment? Coincidence?

 

– Fairfax

48%
×