22 S e cti o n ON E – GENERAL The Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau have a special relation- Rights Review Tribunal has had the ability to issue a ship with New Zealand. All three are part of the realm declaration of inconsistency in relation to legislation that of New Zealand and their citizens have full rights of is incompatible with the right to freedom from discrimi- New Zealand citizenship. New Zealand also has a high nation in section 19 of BoRA under the HRA. 36 The first domestic population of people from the Cook Islands, declaration of inconsistency, Howard v Attorney–General Niue and Tokelau. This population is likely to increase, (No.3), was issued in 2008. given that it is probable Pacific states will be disproportionately affected by global warming and climate change. New Zealand’s constitutional relationships with the Cook Islands and Niue and its administration of Tokelau will be relevant in the proposed review of New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements. The UPR has created an impetus for Pacific States that may lead to the emergence of a regional approach to engaging both with the UPR itself and with human rights generally. At least four states (Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Nauru and Palau) are actively considering the establishment of an NHRI. New Zealand context Kaupapa o Aotearoa Under section 7, the Attorney-General is required to report to Parliament on any apparent inconsistencies between proposed legislation and the rights in the BoRA. Section 7, therefore, provides a tool for ensuring transparency in the development of legislation. It is discussed further in the chapter on the right to justice. Some legislation gives an organisation or agency a role in overseeing compliance with the international instruments. The most obvious example is the Human Rights Act, which provides the statutory basis for the Human Rights Commission. The long title of the HRA refers to the role of “better protect[ing] human rights in New Zealand in general accordance with the United Nations Covenants or Conventions on Human Rights”. The functions of the Commission are laid out in more detail in section 5 of the The strongest commitment a state can make to protecting HRA. These include promoting respect, understanding the human rights of its citizens is to embed them in a and appreciation of human rights in New Zealand. They constitution, creating a statutory regime to enforce the also include the ability to report to the Prime Minister international standards.33 on the desirability of legislative or administrative action Although the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BoRA) affirms New Zealand’s commitment to the ICCPR, it is not supreme law. Despite arguments that it has attained a “constitutional status”, because of the nature of the rights that it protects, the BoRA 34 can still be overridden by Parliament. However, New Zealand’s policy of not ratifying a treaty until the necessary laws are in place, and to ensure better compliance with the standards in the international instruments on human rights, or the desirability of New Zealand becoming bound by any international instrument on human rights. The Commission also has responsibility for promoting human rights generally, including providing education on the role of the treaty bodies and monitoring their recommendations. its longstanding commitment to social welfare, has meant enforcing the international standards. 35 New Zealand today Aotearoa i tënei rä Section 4 of the act deals with the concept of parliamen- New Zealand has become more active and has engaged tary sovereignty and makes it clear that the courts cannot internationally over the period since 2004, with cabinet override an act of parliament. Since 2001, the Human ministers participating in treaty-body processes and that its domestic law generally provides a framework for 33 Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (2008), p 23 34 Rishworth P, Huscroft G, Optican S and Mahoney R (2003), The New Zealand Bill of Rights (Auckland: OUP) 35 Not all of the rights contained in the international Bill of Rights are given explicit domestic legal expression or protection. It does not include property rights or the right to privacy. 36 HRA, section 92J. To date, there have been two findings of inconsistency; Howard v Attorney-General (No.3) (2008) 8 HRNZ 378, and Atkinson v the Ministry of Health HRRT 33/05, decision no. 01/2010.