Law and Society - Sentencing and Imprisonment
Sentencing Process - Police v Huber
Elicia Huber escaped managed isolation to attend her father's tangi after her compassionate exemption was denied.
She was charged under the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020, s 26, which allows for imprisonment up to 6 months or a fine up to for non-compliance.
Sentencing Act 2002 guides the sentencing process.
Snapshot of sentencing process:
Determine a starting point based on the offense's gravity.
Consider aggravating factors to increase the sentence.
Consider mitigating factors to reduce the sentence.
Discounts for guilty pleas.
Determine final sentence and appropriateness of community-based sentences.
Judges consider past similar cases, pre-sentence reports, and purposes/principles of sentencing (Sentencing Act 2002, sections 7, 8).
Purposes of sentencing (Section 7(1) of the Sentencing Act 2002):
Accountability, responsibility, victim interests, reparation, denunciation, deterrence, community protection, rehabilitation.
Huber Case:
Starting point: 2-3 months imprisonment.
Aggravating factors: Previous criminal history, planned escape.
Mitigating factors: Grief, attempts to seek compassionate leave (50% reduction).
Final sentence: 14 days imprisonment due to the need for general deterrence and the exclusion of alternative sentences.
Critical perspective: Disparity in sentencing compared to a similar case (buying alcohol), questions of Tikanga appropriateness, and the limits of imprisonment as deterrence.
Imprisonment Figures in Aotearoa New Zealand
Differing views on prison population:
Government aims to reduce prison population through rehabilitation and mental health services.
Opposition focuses on genuinely reducing crime as the primary way to decrease prison population.
Influence of economic systems:
Liberal market economies (e.g., NZ) are more punitive.
Coordinated market economies focus on reintegration.
Influence of political systems:
First Past the Post (FPP) systems imprison more people.
Proportional voting systems (e.g., NZ since 1996) tend to imprison less.
Citizen-initiated referenda and focus of small political parties influence NZ's approach to crime despite proportional voting.
Three Strikes Legislation
Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010 (Three Strikes Law):
For 40 serious violent crimes.
First offense: warning.
Second offense: full sentence without parole.
Third offense: maximum sentence unless "manifestly unjust."
Repealed in November 2022 due to concerns about its effectiveness and disproportionate impact on Māori.
Reinstated in December 2024 with modifications.
First strike applies to sentences above 12 months, then 24 months for strikes two and three.
Extended "manifestly unjust" exception for judicial discretion.
Remand in Prison Crisis
As of March 2025, 42.9% of prisoners are on remand, awaiting trial or sentencing (4578).
Concerns about the length of time in custody on remand.
Bail Amendment Act 2013 introduced presumption of detention, unless the person can prove they should be released.
Concerns it erodes right to trial without undue delay and presumption of innocence (NZBORA 1990, s 25).
Ethnic Inequities
Ethnicity of prison population (March 2025):
Māori: 52.6%
European: 28.2%
Pacific: 12.2%
Mass incarceration is Māori incarceration due to:
Colonization, broad social forces, specific risk factors, and discretion in the system (racism).
Key Questions:
What does the Huber case tell us about the sentencing process?
How does NZ’s legal system inform NZ’s high imprisonment figures and the imprisonment inequities facing Māori?