Comment From The Capital Privilege Breach Charge... (Press, 4 November 1968)

On 3 November 1968, the Speaker of the House, Mr R. Jack, ruled that there was a prima facie case of breach of Parliamentary privilege against the “Evening Post” following a complaint raised by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Kirk, and supported by the Acting Prime Minister, Mr Marshall. This ruling facilitates the referral of the matter to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Privileges, which will determine whether a breach occurred and recommend any potential penalties. The final decision, however, rests with Parliament itself. The case revolves around a twelve-word headline that was deemed potentially problematic. While the Speaker noted that the headline did not misrepresent the content of a deposition made by Professor J. H. Robb, the president of the New Zealand Homosexual Law Reform Society, the focus lies in whether the headline fairly summarised the deposition. The Privileges Committee, composed of party leaders and three legally trained Parliament members, will conduct a detailed examination of the facts. This committee has not taken significant action since 1912, when it censured two individuals. Historically, the Privileges Committee lacks the authority to impose firm penalties autonomously, often resolving issues through apologies or acceptance rather than punishment. Parliamentary powers include the capacity to impose fines or even imprisonment for privilege breaches; however, these measures raise practical complications, as the Sergeant-at-Arms lacks jurisdiction beyond Parliament, leading to absurd situations in the past. The tensions surrounding the current case highlight the delicate nature of media scrutiny and legislative privilege. The comparison between the impact of a headline and a detailed report is central to the consideration, as the force of a headline can disproportionately influence readers. Although the initial publication may not have attracted widespread attention, the controversy incited by Mr Kirk's remarks has drawn significant public focus to both the article and headline, raising broader discussions around media accountability and respect for Parliamentary proceedings. The Privileges Committee is tasked with navigating these nuanced issues, weighing the significance of the headline against the context provided in the complete article.

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