Abolishing the right to silence: another good reason not to vote National

By Lucy Rogers

National have just proposed abolishing the right to silence in cases of alleged child murder: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/election-2026-national-proposes-exception-to-right-to-silence-in-child-murder-cases/CGMOXY5M6RBQFFYQDJDE5AFZIA/

Paul Goldsmith correctly identifies the right to silence as a “fundamental principle” of our legal system, and then turns around in the very next sentence and say that it shouldn’t apply in alleged child murder cases because they are so heinous.

There are plenty of other extremely heinous offences: arbitrarily carving out an exemption for alleged child murder cases renders the entire concept of the right to silence incoherent. The right to silence will be gone in a few years if we create arbitrary exceptions.

By the way, people should stop saying that National is proposing abolishing the right to silence in child murder cases: it is proposing abolishing the right to silence in cases where it is alleged that a child has been murdered. That means you’re forcing people to give evidence contrary to ancient liberties where there is in fact a legal presumption of innocence.

This policy is populist nonsense. It’s sad to live in an era where people don’t get the point of freedoms our ancestors died for. So much for conservatives who see the right wing as champions of civil liberties.