Kiwiblog

The Dom Post reports:

Former Whanganui mayor Michael Laws is refusing to accept a High Court ruling that the council’s controversial gang-patch ban is unlawful and invalid.

The decision, issued by Justice Denis Clifford yesterday, will send Whanganui District Council back to the drawing board to create a bylaw that does not effectively ban gang insignia.

But Mr Laws, who spearheaded the bylaw and is now a councillor, said the judge was “wrong in fact”.

The High Court found in favour of Auckland Hells Angels gang member Philip Schubert, who argued that the council had exceeded the powers granted to it by Parliament when it passed the Prohibition of Gang Insignia Bylaw in September 2009.

Parliament had allowed the council to ban gang insignia in specified, but not all, public places. Because the bylaw banned gang insignia throughout the wider Whanganui urban area, it had effectively removed them from the district and was therefore unlawful, Justice Clifford ruled. He also said the Whanganui council failed to fully take into account rights regarding freedom of expression.

I din’t think this is that big a setback to those who want the patch ban. Basically the court has just said you can’t ban them in the entire urban area of Whanganui.  The Council really just needs to come back with a bylaw which bans them in specific places – those places might comprise 90% of the urban area of Whanganui.

Of cours ethe composition of the Council has changed, and it is possible that a majority on the Council no longer support a patch ban – off memory the new Mayor doesn’t.

The Dom Post reports:

Local government leaders are seeking a law change to allow other councils to follow Whanganui’s lead and ban gang patches.

Whanganui was given the right to pass a bylaw last year banning all gang insignia except tattoos from public places, but other councils wanting to do the same must get their own enabling law through Parliament.

Local Government New Zealand president Lawrence Yule said the organisation was trying to get a blanket law change that would allow any council to pass similar bylaws.

No surprise.

Palmerston North has also floated a ban on patches if the Whanganui law sees an exodus of gang members to the city, though mayor Jono Naylor said there was no problem at present.

So gang members would rather live in Wanganui with a ban on their patches, than move to Palmerston North.

Can’t really blame them!

While well intentioned, I have never been a fan of the gang patch law.

My concerns were heightened yesterday when I heard the local Police Commander explain why the City Council has passed the by-law (as allowed for by the law passed by Parliament.

The Commander said that local residents wanted to impose a dress code for their city.

People should impose dress codes on their private property. I don’t think it is the role of governments to impose dress codes on public places (so long as people are not indecent/naked).

The law passed last night by 62 votes to 59. If Helen Clark was still an MP it would have been 62 – 60. ACT had three MPs (Hide, Boscawen and Garrett) vte in favour and two (Roy and Douglas) vote against.

I’m not convinced the new law will be effective, and I also think criminalising people for what they wear, rather than what they do, is the start of a potentially slippery slope.

However this has been a law strongly sought by the Wanganui District Council, and most of the people who live there. Parliament has a tradition of agreeing to most local bills.

It will be interesting to see how the law works in practice.

Chester Borrows and Michael Laws will disagree with me, but I am unconvinced banning the public display of gang insignia will reduce violent crime, and is justified.

Gangs commit enough actual crimes, that there is no need to go and invent a new crime of wearing a patch, to get them on. I am all for a crack down on gangs.  Gangs exist primarily to arrange crime. But the solution to gangs is to arrest gang members when they break the law, and if they are a recividist offende, keep them inside for a very long time. Longer sentences and less parole would do a lot more than banning gang patches.

Having said that, I don’t think voting for the bill to go to select committee is a bad thing, as it will allow the issues of gangs to be considered. But personally I hope it doesn’t emerge out.