Minister doesn't like the truth.

If we ever needed to learn what a crock the Compensation Process in New Zealand is then Judith Collins is giving the country a panoramic display of why the Law and Politics should not be mixed. The Minister, herself a lawyer without distinguishing note, and a long time politician has the chance to play 'The King' in New Zealand's antiquated approach to  addressing Compensation. An approach long ago left behind by the English Law on which our system is based.

If ever the country was looking like bumpkins from down under the Minister has achieved that in short order, possibly more so when the reasoning of our own Court of Appeal on the Bain case was shredded by the Privy Council. The same dullards that elevated themselves to Judge and Jury status are getting their own back, a chance to vindicate a faulty prosecution and recover the high ground on an actual Miscarriage of Justice. Well, it may not be that bad - but it's easy to argue that is the direction the Bain case has suddenly taken. But it is the petulant Minister who undermines the process and transparency because of her behaviour. What has she done, well she is angry nothing plainer to see than that, she is also defensive and making outrageous attacks on the author of the Binnie report. The decorum - less Minister is all at sea, juggling politics and the reputation of herself it seems now, and two Governmental departments.

Why on earth's name the Minister went public with an attack on Binney but holds his report secret is bewildering on the surface while the obvious mechanics of it simply do not make sense. She has said that the report 'appears' to have been based on incorrect facts and showed a misunderstanding of New Zealand Law, lacked robustness in it's reasoning and so on. She has since called for a 2nd report or a 'peer' review of the report from previous High Court Judge Robert Fisher. No doubt Mr Fisher is more than capable of assisting the Minister but a High Court Judge couldn't be fairly described as a 'peer' of a Supreme Court Judge - the position Binnie held at the time of his retirement. On further reading it is revealed that the report is not being reviewed in full but rather the way Mr Binnie reached his conclusions. When that is concluded....hold on to your hat, yes Mr Binnie will be consulted on Mr Fisher's review. I guess it rugby terms Mr Binnie will be seen to out of the 'sin bin' by then and competent to look at the review where earlier, before his time in the 'bin' and his public thrashing by the Minister he wasn't competent - in fact he didn't understand NZ law or even know the facts of the case. On that issue David Bain's lawyer has pointed out the highly relevant question as to what Ms Collins would know about the bloody case anyway (the bloody word is mine, not the QCs.)

Nothing personal of course from the Minister in lambasting a highly ranked Commonwealth Judicial Officer, but then she reveals that he sent her additional 'reports' unsolicited which she wasn't going to pay for, giving a perception that Binnie was overcharging or some other such nonsense. I wouldn't be surprised if Ms Collins rather than receives a bill has delivered a summons for damages. For a moment just reconsider that the Minister is meant to 'acting' in the role of a person holding a neutral interest in the outcome of the Compensation application, yet she now admits that she sat down with Crown Law and had them look at the report. Crown Law itself played a significant and active role in the Miscarriage of Justice perpetuated against David Bain and it was they who 'chose' to have a retrial when the Privy Council has signalled that they had the 'choice' to decide a retrial wasn't necessary. They went ahead anyway, spending millions only to see the Jury return in record time with not guilty verdicts. Think they might be 'hurting' a little and wanting to get their own back? Think, they like the police, might be in a bit of a 'tizzy' over what Binnie has said about their conduct in rail roading an innocent man into prison. By all reports that's Mr Binnie's view: that David Bain is innocent on the balance of probabilities yet the 'inane' Minister requires Bain to jump through hoops as though he were a prisoner in one of her prisons, and not a free member of the public who has been wronged by the state, accused of killing his own family when  the evidence (that which was hidden or left unanalysed by the police and Crown) clearly show Binnie's decision as correct - David's innocence.

Throughout all of this, another abuse of process from the Minister - not consulting with David's lawyers, giving him a copy of Binnie's report or discussing her concerns about the report and therefore the Application for Compensation. That situation has finally reached the point that David Bain has been forced to go to the Ombudsman's Office for a release of the documents. In the Minister's snarling put down's of Binnie, and his apparent lack of ability to 'comprehend' a Miscarriage of Justice, she also took a shot at who? Why the defence for daring to ask for an overseas person to review the application. I guess that implies that if they hadn't asked then everything would have been fine and the Minister would have got a report that she liked, and that those she consulted with - Crown Law, 'liked as well.'

Which brings us to the unsatisfactory position it puts David Fisher in. If all else is unclear to Mr Fisher one thing isn't - the Minister doesn't want any of this 'innocence' stuff. No no no. Let's also consider the paucity of logic in the Minister's actions in another way. What sort of idiot considers that a man or woman with 50 years of Law administration behind them at the highest level wouldn't possibly be mindful of the change of Jurisdiction and therefore Law when reviewing a case in a Country not their own - one answer to that a very dumb idiot. There is no depth to Ms Collin's protests other than to cover up and keep things secret. Nobody could expect that if Mr Binnie's report is so flawed that he should be asked for his opinion on another report that doesn't cover the full breadth of his own.

There are many questions as to credibility brought alive by the Minister's actions. She has made one very public - that Binnie has contacted her and the department in the last few months since September. He says she hasn't, he also says (despite what Collin's has told the public) that she hasn't voiced any concerns with him about the report.

A few months ago Collins looked like a Prime Minister in waiting, someone comfortable in the Minister of Justice's chair - now she looks like dog tukka.