TO: Barbara Edmonds
MP for Mana
Dear Barbara,

I've received a notification from your office that you've referred my request to Mr Faafoi.

Please be advised that I put this matter before Mr Faafoi over decade ago... he said he'd get back to me, but sadly he hasn't, so I've made a public request here; https://fyi.org.nz/request/16575-which-o...

I've now written to you in your capacity as my MP in the Mana electorate and as an officer of the court. I now seek your opinion as to which of the two attached decisions has to be accepted as correct. For the record, I've hand delivered this material to your office on two occasions and made this request in person, but to date this is the first acknowledgement I've received.

Please consider the attached decision of the Court of Appeal dated 8 October 2003. This document was recorded by the registry as being the final order of the court.

The other document dated 14 October 2003 was created by a solicitor in a law office and altered for the benefit of his client, the record confirms it was concealed by the registrar for 12 years and not disclosed to the parties, nor placed on the High Court file. (the documents also confirm an obvious conflict of interest with the lawyer contemporaneously acting for the estate & a beneficiary in her personal capacity)

All I've asked you to do is confirm a legal certainty, there can be only one correct decision despite several judicial attempts to "second guess" the result. Our society relies on the judiciary for enforcement and clarification of the law and we are duty bound as citizens to obey their dicta, conversely the rule of law becomes a sham if we allow the judiciary to effectively ignore the finality of their own rulings.

I'm now saying this matter is an offence under s258 of the Crimes Act because the documents have been altered and concealed. I believe your current employment as an MP primarily involves representing citizens interests by passing laws and monitoring the actions of the government, accordingly I'd like to invite you to determine which of the two documents should be recognized as legitimate, and as my elected representative and an officer of the court, refer my concerns to the Crown Law Office or the New Zealand Police.

Basically it comes down to having the moral courage and capacity to make a simple choice between black and white, I see no great legal conundrum here, do you?.

Kind regards,

John Creser

John Creser

Attachments5:40 PM (6 minutes ago)

to greg.o'connor, Leanne
Hello Leanne,

Thanks for your email and your advice from Greg O'Connor, which unfortunately misunderstands my request. You've said that Mr O'Connor can't consider anything that's under Appeal, whereas I'm not complaining about an appeal, I agree with the decision of the court ! I'm asking Mr O Connor as a New Zealand lawmaker to acknowledge that a decision of the Court must be final.

I'm asking him as an individual lawmaker to confirm his position on a piece of legislation I am continuing to seek amended by parliament. While I acknowledge the petition has been reported to parliament, the process completely disregarded the rules of fair play and natural justice,and I've asked the Clerk of the House for the evidence here on FYI

Given that I spent 3 years waiting to present evidence and speak to my petition for 15 minutes without so much as the offer o a zoom meeting, its clear to me that its something the government is uncomfortable to discuss on the public record, but that's not democracy in action is it?

The lack of due process should in itself be be reason enough too post it off to the Privileges Committee.

I've written to each and every MP because the justice committee refused to hear any evidence or refer the matter to Parliament. This matter is now as much about the committee's breach of the rules of fair play and natural justice as the fraud itself.

I've also circulated this material to community law centers around the country because Parliament, the Court of Appeal and the Law Society haven't been able to decide which one of the two deserves a place on the public record. This does not involve any complexity, it's effectively asking whether or not you or your colleagues are capable of telling the difference between black & white. A public record of this request can be found on FYI here; https://fyi.org.nz/user/john_creser/requ...

On 25 August 2021, the justice select committee decided not to seek evidence or hear submissions on the petition below. I've now written to the Minister & Parliament to answer the questions that the Justice Select Committee have refused to consider.

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petition...

I'm concerned about two materially different Court of Appeal decisions resulting from the same hearing in 2003. In CA193/2003 [2015] NZCA 579 Para (31), the Court of Appeal led by President Justice Stephen Kos said; “Some form of error seems to have occurred given the discrepancy between the judgment and the (Court’s) sealed order but we are unable to determine some 12 years after the event how this came about or which version is correct”

https://www.infonews.co.nz/news.cfm?id=1...

The Chief Archivist in charge of the public record has said:“The error that appears to have occurred in the sealed judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 14 October 2003, predates the passing of the PRA. A record keeping failure in 2003 cannot be considered a breach of a provision that only came into force in 2005.” Neither the Archivist or the Justice Department have explained why the document was concealed by the registry for 12 years.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/court-ref...

Given that the Court of Appeal has admitted the error and the Chief Archivist has said the error occurred in the 14 October Judgement, I'm writing to ask if you have anyone in your office with the ability (or moral courage) to opine which one of the two decisions is correct.

This correspondence is in the public domain and published in connection with the record of petition 87688.

Kind regards,

Leanne Cubitt <Leanne.Cubitt@parliament.govt.nz>
Mon, Sep 6, 10:14 AM (7 days ago)
Hi John
I am responding on Greg’s behalf. Unfortunately once a petition has been reported on there is no further opportunity to progress the petition. Greg is also unable to respond and give any decisions regarding court appeals.
I understand this has obviously caused you a lot of distress and I’m sorry to tell you Greg is unable to help.
Kind Regards
Leanne Cubitt | Executive Assistant to Greg O’Connor

To: John Creser fyi-request-16575-f5650498@requests.fyi.org.nz

Kris Faafoi
Minister for Justice
24 September 2021 ( Received 24 October 2021)

Dear Mr Creser
Court of Appeal
I refer to your message received via the FYI website on 31 August 2021.
You have sought my opinion on two decisions of the Court of Appeal. You have asked
“which one of the two decisions [I] consider correct”.
I am unable to comment on, or be involved in, the details of a specific case that has been
considered by a Judge. This is because the judiciary must be, and be seen to be, free from
interference by another branch of Government.
The Official Information Act 1982 applies to information that is held by a Minister of the
Crown in their official capacity. However, it does not require Ministers to create information
in order to provide an explanation or opinion. Therefore, your request is refused under s
18(g) of the Official Information Act 1982, on the basis that I do not hold this information, and
I have no grounds for believing that the information is either held by, or connected more
closely with the functions of, another Minister, department or local authority.
Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely

Hon Kris Faafoi
Minister of Justice