NZ Council for Civil Liberties

Submission: Electoral Amendment Bill

About the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties

  1. The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties (‘the Council’) is a voluntary, not-for-profit organisation founded in 1952 which advocates to promote human rights and maintain civil liberties.
  1. We wish to make an oral submission to the Committee.

The Council opposes this bill

  1. The Council rejects this bill as an attack on our democracy.
  1. Universal franchise is the foundation for any democracy. The Council has consistently opposed limits on the franchise, and opposes the limits which predate this bill. The Council supports an electoral system that provides a broad definition of eligible voters and enables all eligible voters to be able to vote.
  1. Sir Geoffrey Palmer wrote the following about this bill:2https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/08/12/geoffrey-palmer-sounding-the-bugles-of-democratic-retreat/

It is never a good time to weaken the strands of New Zealand democracy, but especially not when democracy around the world is in peril from populist authoritarianism. Undoubtedly the measure is a step backward, and the things that needed improving could have been improved relatively easily, instead of sounding the bugles of democratic retreat.

  1. This bill appears to be an attempt to skew the outcomes of general elections by making it more difficult for particular demographics to vote. This is anti-democratic.

The Attorney General’s Bill of Rights Act section 7 Report

  1. The Attorney General has assessed that this bill cannot be justified in a free and democratic society.3https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/25072025-Electoral-Amendment-Bill.pdf

The Right to Vote

  1. Article 21(3) of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, to which Aotearoa New Zealand is a signatory, states that:

The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures. [emphasis added]

  1. Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Aotearoa New Zealand has ratified, states that “Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity … to vote.” [emphasis added]
  1. The Council agrees with the Attorney General’s Bill of Rights Act (BORA) section 7 report (BORA report) that the bill is an unreasonable attack on BORA section 12 which says “Every New Zealand citizen who is of or over the age of 18 years … has the right to vote in genuine periodic elections.”

Changes to Enrolment

  1. Clause 4 of the bill eliminates voting day enrolment.
  1. The Council views voting day enrolment as an important factor in getting eligible voters to vote. Removing voting day enrolment will exclude voters for no good reason.
  1. The Bill also stops people from registering to vote after the writ for the election has been issued — another act of voter suppression.
  1. The Council agrees with the Attorney General that there is no reason to believe that any benefit is obtained from eliminating same day enrolment, and that therefore clause 4 is incompatible with a free and democratic society.4BORA report paragraphs 32 to 47, particularly paragraph 39.

Recommendation 1
Remove clauses 4 through 8 from the bill.

Lowering the voting age to 16

  1. Clauses 4 to 8 of this bill also change the age at which people gain the franchise from 18 years to 18 years and 13 days.
  1. The Council takes this opportunity to remind Parliament of our long-standing support for reducing the voting age to 16 years. Using any other age is contrary to the intent of the prohibition of age discrimination set out in section 21(1)(i) of the Human Rights Act.
  1. The Council also notes that the government in the United Kingdom is currently legislating to reduce the age at which people become eligible to vote to 16.5https://www.gov.uk/government/news/16-year-olds-to-be-given-right-to-vote-through-seismic-government-election-reforms

Recommendation 2
Amend section 60(f) of the principal act to change “the age of 18 years on polling day” with “the age of 16 years on polling day”.

People in prisons

  1. Clause 10 amends section 80(1)(d), which allowed people sentenced to less than three years to vote, to prohibit everyone temporarily in prison from voting.
  1. The Council has always opposed depriving people in prison of their right to vote, as the limitation of our liberties is clear and the benefit entirely fictional.
  1. In 2015 the High Court, in Taylor v Attorney-General, ruled:6Taylor v Attorney-General [2015] NZHC 1706, [2015] 3 NZLR 791 [Taylor (HC)] at [79]

Section 80(1)(d) of the Electoral Act 1993 (as amended by the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Act 2010) is inconsistent with the right to vote affirmed and guaranteed in s12(a) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and cannot be justified under s5 of that Act.

In 2017, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Attorney General’s appeal of the High Court decision, indicating their agreement with the High Court.7Attorney-General v Taylor [2017] NZCA 215, [2017] 3 NZLR 24 (Kós P, Randerson, Wild, French and Miller JJ) [Taylor (CA)]. In 2018, the Attorney General appealed again to the Supreme Court, who also agreed with the High Court.8https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/2018/2018-NZSC-104.pdf

  1. In 2019, the Waitangi Tribunal ruled:9https://www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz/en/news/tribunal-releases-report-on-maori-prisoners-voting-rights

Section 80(1)(d) of the Electoral Act 1993 breached the principles of the Treaty. The Tribunal further found that the Crown has failed in its duty to actively protect the right of Māori to equitably participate in the electoral process and exercise their tino rangatiratanga individually and collectively.

  1. There is reason to believe that the Supreme Court will rule clause 10 to be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act, on precisely the same grounds that they have ruled against section 80(1)(d) before.

Recommendation 3
Remove clause 10 from the bill.

Recommendation 4
Remove section 80(1)(d) from the principal act.

Providing food, drink, or entertainment

  1. Clause 46 prohibits providing food, beverages, or entertainment within 100 meters of a polling place.10The Council notes that the Attorney General’s section 7 report says 50 meters, and wonders what other voter suppression measures were added to the bill after the Attorney General no longer had an opportunity to defend our rights. Although intended to reduce the risk of ‘treating’ — effectively using refreshments to convince someone to cast their vote for a particular candidate or party — the Council does not believe that there is any serious evidence of treating occurring in Aotearoa New Zealand to such an extent that would justify the restrictions on food and beverage that the bill introduces.
  1. The Council notes that many democracies, including our largest neighbour, Australia, allow campaigning on election day.11The Council further notes the Australian tradition of “democracy sausage” is also in direct contradiction to this bill. The Council recommends that the Electoral Commission be funded to conduct experiments to see if providing refreshments to voters increases voter turnout. If anything, this government needs to prove that suppressing freedom of expression on election day is in the public interest.
  1. Clause 46 criminalises simple kindness and basic human decency. The Council rejects the criminalisation of feeding the hungry or giving drink to the thirsty.
  1. The Council further rejects the unjustified attack on free speech in clause 46. Not only is music being prohibited, but so are any other form of speech which might be deemed to be entertaining.
  1. The Council further notes that providing food is traditional at marae, as indeed it is to feed guests in most cultures. Therefore clause 46 will act to preclude marae as polling places, further depriving underserved communities of their liberties.

Recommendation 6
Remove clause 46 from the bill.

The Right to Benefit of Lesser Penalty

  1. Clause 10 invites a declaration of inconsistency with our BORA section 25(g) right to benefit from the lesser penalty, by changing sentences which allowed for voting to sentences which do not allow for voting.
  1. The Council agrees with the BORA report that this bill is an unreasonable limit on BORA section 25(g). Parliament does not have the power to retroactively impose further penalties to those which have already been applied by the courts.

Conclusion

  1. The Council supports efforts to increase the ability of legitimate voters to be able to vote, and rejects those which aim to make it harder.
  1. These are dark days for democracy around the world and this bill brings that darkness to Aotearoa New Zealand. We strongly recommend that the Select Committee should defend our democracy by rejecting this bill.
  1. The Council thanks members of the Committee for their time and consideration of our submission.