R v Banks

[2013] NZHC 3223

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2012-085-9093 [2013] NZHC 3223

THE QUEEN

v

JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS

Hearing:	(on the papers)
Counsel:	P E Dacre QC for Crown D P H Jones QC for Mr Banks
Judgment:	3 December 2013

JUDGMENT OF HEATH J

This judgment was delivered by me on 3 December 2013 at 4.30pm pursuant to Rule

11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:

Crown Law, Wellington Parlane Law, Auckland Counsel:

P E Dacre QC, Auckland

D P H Jones QC, Auckland

R v BANKS [2013] NZHC 3223 [3 December 2013]

[1]     Contemporaneously, I have delivered a judgment dismissing Mr Banks’ application for judicial review of a decision of the District Court to commit him for trial on a charge brought under s 134(1) of the Local Electoral Act 2001.1

[2]      Counsel agreed, in advance of the judicial review hearing, that if I were to dismiss that application, the criminal proceeding could be transferred by consent to this Court for hearing.  The jurisdiction for such an order springs from s 28J of the District Courts Act 1947.

[3]      In the circumstances, I agree that this prosecution should be tried in this

Court.  My reasons are:

(a)      The Crown alleges that Mr Banks, a sitting Member of Parliament, knowingly transmitted a false return of electoral expenses and donations to the electoral officer following an unsuccessful campaign for the Auckland Mayoralty in 2010.

(b)If  Mr  Banks  were  convicted,  the  Epsom  electoral  seat,  which Mr Banks currently holds, will be declared vacant and he will no longer hold office as a Member of Parliament.

(c)      Mr Banks is also the leader of the ACT political party.  That party has a confidence and supply agreement with the current government.

(d)A general election is scheduled for next year and the outcome of this trial could conceivably have an impact on the result of the general election.

(e)       It is in the public interest that the senior trial Court conduct the trial.

[4]      By  consent,  I  make  an  order  transferring  the  proceeding  to  this  Court. Mr Banks is remanded at large to appear at callover at 9am on 11 December 2013.  I anticipate a plea will be entered at that time to the count contained in the current

indictment that has been filed in the District Court.  Also, an election will need to be made as to trial before a jury or Judge sitting alone.

[5]      For the same reasons given for transferring the proceeding to this Court, I recommend to the Criminal List Judge that this proceeding be given priority.  It is undesirable that a trial, the result of which could have a material impact on a general election, be delayed until a time proximate to polling day.   I understand that, depending upon whether Mr Banks elects trial by jury or Judge-alone, a hearing date might be available in the first quarter of next year.

[6]      In anticipation of callover, counsel for the Crown may wish to reconsider whether charges involving three separate donations should be incorporated into a single count.  Difficulties of the type discussed by the Supreme Court in Mason v R2 may potentially arise.  That is something for counsel to consider rather than for the

Court, at this stage, to direct.

P R Heath J

Delivered at 4.30pm on 3 December 2013