Opposition parties have hit out at the Government’s reintroduction of Three Strikes legislation, calling it “political posturing” and “archaic”.
Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced the return of a rejigged Three Strikes law today, alongside Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.
A similar “Three Strikes” law was brought in under the previous National government, but was scrapped under the last Labour government.
It aimed to deter offenders with the threat of progressively punishing repeat offenders. Someone convicted of a third qualifying offence automatically received the maximum penalty without parole, barring some exceptions — that which a court determined would be “manifestly unjust”.
A new policy under the current Government differs in some areas to the previous Three Strikes law. The previous law had been criticised for not impacting the drivers of crime, as well as disproportionately affecting Māori, Pasifika and people with physical and psychiatric disabilities.
Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb said the Government was bringing back a law that had little evidential backing “just to look tough”.
“This is political posturing of the worst kind. Three strikes did not reduce serious offending.
“In fact there was almost no evidence to show it deters offending, and instead it resulted in severe distortions in sentencing third strike offenders.
“One example provided at the time the legislation was repealed was a person who was jailed for 10 years where the sentencing judge said they would ordinarily have imposed 18 months in prison for that kind of offending.”
He said another case included a person getting a seven-year sentence for “patting a prison guard’s bottom”.
“That was unjust and can still occur under this new proposal.”
Webb said repeat offending was already an aggravating factor and judges could already impose hard sentences where appropriate.
“All this law does is continue the Government’s attack on the judiciary by removing sentencing discretion from the courts.
“Judges should be left to make decisions that take into account all of the circumstances of the offending, the offender and the impact on the victim.”
Green Party justice spokesperson Tamatha Paul said resurrecting the “archaic” Three Strikes legislation was an “unwelcome return to a failed American-style approach to justice”.
She said New Zealand needed a justice system that treated all people with humanity, dignity and respect.
“Bringing back the failed three strikes law will lead to grossly unfair results that disproportionately impact Māori, including much harsher sentences than would otherwise be imposed.”
Paul said New Zealand had one of the highest imprisonment rates in the developed world and that was “despite mounting evidence” mass incarceration has failed to bring down rates of crime, keep communities safe, or rehabilitate those in our system.
“The Government is hell-bent on funnelling more and more people into prisons. It is another poorly thought out idea imported from the United States that is designed to do little more than make the Government look ‘tough’.”
She said if the Government “genuinely cared” about addressing crime it would take action to address the causes of offending, which she said included mental healthcare, addiction treatment, housing and “liveable income support, while introducing a new pathway away from prisons”.
“The three strikes law means that mistakes that people might make as teenagers will be with them for their entire life. It means even if you’ve turned your whole life around, you could still end up in prison for life. It means no matter what changes you make towards being a better person, your life is reduced down to these rigid and inhumane three strikes and there’s nothing a judge can do about it.”
On X, formerly Twitter, former PM Helen Clark also weighed in on the issue, saying “reinstating” Three Strikes would have “one certain outcome: driving up prison numbers & spending on incarceration”.
“Money would be better spent on the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners.”
Te Pāti Māori justice spokesperson Tākuta Ferris said the reintroduction of Three Strikes was a “destructive and ineffective piece of law-making” that would “only exacerbate an inherently biased and racist criminal justice system”.
He said the previous law had disproportionately impacted Māori and Pasifika, and Ministry of Justice briefs established that there was no evidence of the policy reducing crime, or having any obvious effect on crime rates at all.
“We know unequivocally that being harder on crime equates to being harder on Māori and those too brown to be white.
“Modelled on US law that disproportionately targeted African Americans, Three Strikes has unjustly perpetuated racism and ensnared Māori with no evidence of reducing crime.”
He said 2022 research into California’s Three Strikes law showed it had no measurable deterrent effects, locked up African Americans and did not address crime.
“This reckless law-making will result in unjust sentences and accelerate mass incarceration of Māori and Pasifika. It lacks evidence and is full of racial bias.
“Intelligent policy and rehabilitation, not punitive measures, are essential for a just society. This is not intelligent; it’s grandstanding for political perception.”
Justice Ministry website page on repeal removed
An information page about the repeal of the Three Strikes legislation on the Justice Ministry’s website was active this morning but was removed shortly before the Government’s announcement.
Access to the archived page showed it laid out concerns about the previous law, including that “there was little evidence that the law had reduced serious offending” and “Māori are overrepresented in the group of offenders who have received a strike” and “the High Court, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court had found sentences imposed under the regime contravened the Bill of Rights Act”.
It also said courts could “already impose sentences equivalent to those under the three strikes law, when it is considered appropriate”.
The Ministry of Justice has been approached for an explanation on why the page was removed.
‘I don’t care if they’re Māori or non-Māori’ – PM
At a press conference announcing the policy, Luxon said Māori were overly represented as the victims of crime in New Zealand, so the legislation would benefit Māori.
“Let’s be really clear here, our goal here is to incarcerate violent offenders, violent sexual offenders. I don’t care whether they’re Māori, or non-Māori. They’re coming off our streets because they cause pain and suffering to regular New Zealanders. That is what it’s all about here. That’s as simple as it gets.”
He said he was calling on all New Zealanders, regardless of ethnicity, to hold up to their rights and responsibilities.
The legislation was worth it if it saved one case of pain and suffering, he said.
“I’m on the side of victims and I’m saying to New Zealanders, irrespective if you’re Māori, Pasifika, non-Māori, whatever — I don’t care — we’re holding ourselves all to the same standard, which is that you don’t get to go around causing that level of pain and suffering on your fellow New Zealanders.
“It’s unacceptable. Utterly, utterly unacceptable.”