Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says:
Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
Labour’s policy to make people accused of sexual assault prove their innocence is in stark contrast to this. Labour are saying that the presumption of innocence will be reversed if you are accused of sexual assault or rape, if the only issue is consent, not that sex occurred.
The Green Party has policy saying:
Encourage commitment to international human rights as contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international conventions, and support the work of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.
So my question to the Greens is, do they support Labour’s policy to reverse the burden of proof for consent in rape cases?
How can you claim to support the UDHR and even entertain for a second Labour’s policy?
While David Cunliffe has backed away from the policy, saying they are just considering it, Andrew Little explicitly said on Twitter changing the burden of proof is policy, and Little is still advocating for the change. Until such a time as Labour unambiguously says there is no chance of a change to burden of proof under Labour, the only safe thing to do is assume it is likely to occur if they get into Government.Tags: human rights, Labour, rape