LAW PROFESSOR ON N.Z. CONSTITUTION

Press, Volume C, Issue 29499, 28 April 1961, Page 15

LAW PROFESSOR ON N.Z. CONSTITUTION

“There is a lot of loose talk about a constitution without any clear idea o:’ what it would be like to have one,” said Professor H. R Gray, professor of law at the University of Canterbury, in an address to the annual meeting of the Canterbury Council for Civil Liberties last evening. The title of Professor Gray’s address was “A Constitution for New Zealand?” New Zealand had a constitution in the Act of 1882. Professor Gray said. The act had the minimum constitututional requirements and among other things established a General Assembly, provided for revenue and the issue of money. South Africa had a more elaborate constitution, he said. There were 152 sections in it.

In Australia the constitution was more elaborate again. The legislative powers of the Commonwealth Parliament were laid down in most meticulous detail. The 1787 Constitution ofthe United States and its 22 amendments dealt with more than the establishment of the organs of State. The first 10 amendments entrenched a number of civil liberties.

“Do we prefer a skeleton framework as in the United Kingdom or New Zealand or a full and detailed provision?” asked Professor Gray. “The advantage of the skeleton is its adaptability. The corollary of this is Parliamentary sovereignty. This means that Parliament may make or unmake any law. Civil liberties are therefore at the mercy of Parliament and under a liberal Parliament you will get liberal civil liberties.

“Generally the full and detailed provision has not this disadvantage since the legislature has only those powers sneciflcally conferred on it by the constitution and these may or may not include con-: stitutional amendment. The

result is usually to put effective control in the hands of the courts,” he said.

“Is it necessary to rewrite the constitution or do We merely wish to entrench civil liberties?” he asked. He quoted the civil liberties written into the American Constitution. "Not all of these ought necessarily to be unqualified,” Professor Gray Said. "Freedom of speech can lead to defamation, obscene and abusive language or sedition or what has been called 'trial by newspaper’!” He quoted a case where a man on trial for murder showed the judge a picture of himself in the local paper under the caption, “killer in court ” In New Zealand that is protected against by the con. tempt of court legislation, he said.

Freedom of assembly hai as its reverse side the creating of a public nuisahce, and in the case of arbitrary arrests the term “arbitrary” had to be defined and there might be cases where the public need required arbitrary arrests. “If I havb asked rhore questions than I have answered it is because there is no use in calling for a constitution for New Zealand unless these questions, both political and legal, are answered,” said Professor Gray.