44 In 2014 Parliament’s Standing Orders were amended to require all section 7 reports to be referred to select committee23 for consideration.24 The Commission welcomes this amendment and believes that it will result in more systematic review and debate of the BORA implications of legislation. 45 Parliament may form a different view about whether a particular right or freedom is limited or whether the limitation is justified. However, that decision is informed by the opinion of the Attorney-General. 46 This means that despite the intent of the reporting mechanism to ensure that legislation complies with BORA a number of significant Bills pass which limit fundamental rights and freedoms. For example, Professor Janet McLean has noted that “in respect of all 27 negative reports that had been tabled as at May 2011, the Government proceeded with the Bill, which “it openly acknowledged as limiting protected rights unreasonably in a way that could not be justified.”25 As at May 2015 there had been 59 negative section 7 reports.26 47 The New Zealand Law Society has suggested that legislation enacted despite a negative section 7 report should be subject to a “sunset clause” to enable it to be periodically reconsidered. The Commission supports this recommendation. 48 A further complication is that a section 7 report is not tabled where a provision may be inconsistent with BORA. Rather it is tabled where it is considered that it is in fact inconsistent. This entails consideration not only of prima facie inconsistency but also justification under section 5 of BORA. Section 5 of BORA provides:27 Subject to section 4, the rights and freedoms contained in this Bill of Rights may be subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. 49 What is justifiable in a free and democratic society is a question for Parliament and will potentially change over time depending on the political, social and economic environment. 23 Select committees are regarded as an important check and balance on the Executive, particularly in a Parliament that lacks an upper house or revising chamber, as is the case in New Zealand. Examination of bills for consideration after the first reading – except for those to which urgency is accorded – is a primary function of select committees. 24 SO 265(5). The recommended amendments to Standing Orders were debated and adopted by the House on 30 July, and came into effect on 15 August 2014: http://www.parliament.nz/resource/ennz/00HOHPBReferenceStOrders4/eb7c8b9e4a6c7aa88a47d14dc4100513b2557e60 25 Professor Janet McLean “Bills of Rights and Constitutional Conventions” (lecture, Victoria University of Wellington, 30 August 2011). 26 McGregor, Bell and Wilson, Faultines: Human Rights in New Zealand (2015); http://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/248782/NO-watermark-Fault-lines-Human-rights-in-NewZealand.pdf 27 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, section 5. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM224792.html Page 17 of 93 Human Rights Commission submission to the Human Rights Committee in relation to New Zealand’s 6th periodic review under the ICCPR