A cardboard sign is still speech: Free Speech Union warns against open-ended police “move-on” powers



by Free Speech Union


DISCLAIMER: Any opinions expressed or statements made in this article are those of the contributors and/or advertisers, and do not necessarily represent the views of the publisher, staff or management of elocal Limited. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information presented, the publishers assume no responsibility for any errors or omissions, or for any consequences thereof.


The Free Speech Union is calling on Parliament to narrow the Summary Offences (Move-on Orders) Amendment Bill, warning it hands police open-ended discretion to move people on, and prosecute them, for peaceful conduct in a public place.


The Bill lets an officer order anyone aged 14 or over to leave a public place for 24 hours on grounds as vague as “disorderly” or “disruptive” behaviour, or for begging. Whatever you think about begging, the Free Speech Union’s concern is narrower: who decides which peaceful presence is allowed in a public place, and on what grounds?

“We are not asking Parliament to go soft on disorder. We are asking it to listen to its own Attorney-General,” said Jillaine Heather, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. “Keep the powers that deal with threatening and aggressive behaviour. What we cannot accept is open-ended discretion to move someone on for nothing more than holding a sign.”

In his section 7 report, Attorney-General Chris Bishop found the begging ground inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression and, in his words, “too wide.” The Bill says it will not apply to protest, but the Free Speech Union warns that reassurance is thinner than it sounds. “Protest activities” is left undefined, and it is the same officer who decides on the spot whether a person is protesting or being “disruptive.”

The Free Speech Union’s objection rests on three points:

  • Peaceful expression does not lose protection because it is unwelcome.
  • Vague grounds and broad police discretion invite selective enforcement and make the law impossible to predict.
  • These powers bite below the criminal threshold, curbing liberty where Parliament has decided it is not warranted.

“This is the latest in a run of bills handing police vague, subjective discretion over who may stand where and say what,” said Heather. “A free society can tell the difference between a threat and a person holding a sign. A law that leaves that judgement to an officer cannot. Narrow the Bill.”

The Free Speech Union will make a submission to the Justice Committee, and encourages New Zealanders who value free expression to do the same.

Advertisement

Human beings cannot flourish unless they are free! We protect, expand, and fight for New Zealanders’ rights to freedom of speech, conscience, and intellectual inquiry. We envision a flourishing New Zealand civil society that values and protects vigorous debate, dissenting ideas, and freedom of speech as cultural cornerstones.

click to share!


or copy this link:

more from elocal

Candace’s Trip To Russia Was Controversial But Not For The Reason That Her Critics Claim

Anger in the UK: Henry Nowak’s murder and the protests that followed (VIDEO, PHOTOS)

The fatal stabbing of the 18-year-old student has sparked outrage over race, policing, and knife crime in Britain

EXCLUSIVE: Maria Zakharova joins ‘Sanchez Effect’ on sidelines of SPIEF-2026

NZ Fuel Watch – Daily Report

April 22, 2026

The Natural Hazards Insurance Act Is Not Working. What This Means For Kiwis