Just read an article about the Act which I had contempt for anyway. What it highlighted is that the expression of views on forums like this breach the Act, and the NZ Bill of Rights. Here is a clip from the article:
“5 Meaning of election advertisement
(1) In this Act, election advertisement—
(a) means any form of words or graphics, or both, that can reasonably be regarded as doing 1 or more of the following:
(i) encouraging or persuading voters to vote, or not to vote, for 1 or more specified parties or for 1 or more candidates or for any combination of such parties and candidates:
(ii) encouraging or persuading voters to vote, or not to vote, for a type of party or for a type of candidate that is described or indicated by reference to views, positions, or policies that are or are not held, taken, or pursued (whether or not the name of a party or the name of a candidate is stated); and
(b) includes—
(i) a candidate advertisement; and
(ii) a party advertisement.
For the lucky few who fall within the exceptions provided in section 5(2), including unpaid bloggers, the EFA has no direct application. But for the rest of us, the EFA imposes significant restrictions on what can be said, when, and by whom:
• The EFA applies throughout the whole of an election year, from 1 January until close of polling on election day (except when a snap election is called): section 4;
• Under section 63(2)(a), all election advertisements must carry the name and address of their promoter;
• Under section 63(3), no promoter is permitted to spend more than the amounts specified in the EFA for the purposes of promoting his or her election advertising;
• Certain classes of people or organisations in the state sector are prohibited from publishing election advertisements at all, or causing or permitting their publication: section 67. These include chief executives of Crown entities and Government departments, Crown entities and Government departments in their corporate capacities, and “instruments of the Crown”; and
• The penalties for wilfully contravening the EFA include fines of up to $100,000 for a financial agent or party secretary convicted of corrupt practice, or $40,000 for illegal practice (sections 142 and 143).
It follows that the EFA has the potential to impose significant limitations on the right of freedom of expression, as affirmed by section 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA), which provides:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.”
What an appalling piece of law.![]()
Bookmarks