The Press Monday, September 28, 1959. Discussing... (Press, 28 September 1959)

On 28 September 1959, "The Press" reported on the complexities surrounding the Crimes Bill, which aimed to consolidate and revise New Zealand's criminal law. This extensive bill had been in development for almost four years, and after its introduction by the National Party Government in 1957, it was set aside for further consideration. Following a change in government, Sir George Finlay, a senior judge, was appointed to review the bill, consulting with various legal and medical experts. The revised version included a controversial clause stating that no person over 21 would be prosecuted for sodomy if both parties consented and were of age. Some interpreted this amendment as a potential legalisation of consensual sexual acts between adults. However, Attorney-General Mr Mason clarified that the bill did not legalise sodomy, as indecent assault between males remained a prosecutable offence, albeit with a reduced maximum penalty from five years to three. Critics argued that labelling particular homosexual acts as "indecency" rather than "sodomy" signified a decline in moral values. In response to mounting criticism, Mr Mason agreed to amend the provisions in question, asserting the need for clarity in the legislation to prevent misinterpretation. The matter became contentious, with Prime Minister expressing concern regarding public debate surrounding certain clauses. He suggested some issues might be better discussed away from the public eye to avoid confusion, especially as New Zealand's parliamentary sessions are broadcasted. This raised questions about the appropriateness of public discussion on homosexuality, contrasting with how the British Parliament addressed similar issues following the Wolfenden Report. The newspaper underscored the necessity for the New Zealand Parliament to ensure that laws reflect current medical, social, and legal perspectives. It also noted the dilemma posed by broadcasting debates, emphasizing the importance of discussing sensitive topics like homosexuality in a responsible manner, potentially before a more limited audience. Ultimately, the article stressed that Parliament must engage with these discussions to promote understanding, despite concerns about misinterpretations and the potential impact on younger listeners.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand