Browsing by Author "Ward, Rachel Megan"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Restricted
Buffering Inappropriate Questioning of Child Complainants: the Use of Intermediaries in New Zealand
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2011) Ward, Rachel Megan
Concerns with the treatment of child complainants in the New Zealand courts have been raised again recently. Involvement in the court process can be stressful and confusing for children (persons under the age of 18) and this is exacerbated by inappropriate questioning, particularly during cross-examination. As a result, the best evidence is not elicited from the complainant and the system does not ensure fairness to all those involved. A number of provisions in the current system allow special treatment for child complainants; however, children are subjected to cross-examination through the ordinary means. During cross-examination, the opposing counsel, who is not necessarily trained in communicating with children, scrutinises the evidence of the complainant in a manner that is often aggressive and intimidating. Cross-examination is considered as “the primary evidential safeguard of the adversary process” as it allows the defendant to test the prosecution’s case and guarantees their right to a fair trial. However, this right must be balanced against the promotion of fairness to complainants and need to obtain accurate and reliable evidence.
Restricted
The Minimum Core: A Principled Approach to Refugee Determinations Based on Violations of Socio-Economic Rights
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2012) Ward, Rachel Megan
This paper examines the minimum core approach to determining claims for refugee status based on violations of rights contained in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). This approach was recently applied by the Immigration and Protection Tribunal in BG (Fiji). As the only country to have applied the minimum core in refugee jurisprudence, New Zealand is boldly promoting the justiciability of ICESCR rights in this context. However, as the minimum core has only been applied to a handful of refugee decisions and there has been no significant discussion of its appropriateness this context, the exact operation of the concept in refugee jurisprudence is poorly understood. The reasoning and analysis of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal in BG (Fiji) is used in this paper as a springboard for a wider discussion of the minimum core concept in refugee jurisprudence.