The bar association says removing funding for the cultural and background reports used in sentencing will undermine rehabilitation and could result in higher rates of reoffending.
The government yesterday confirmed it would scrap legal aid for Section 27 reports, saying they had cost taxpayers millions of dollars and shortened sentences.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said 2500 reports were prepared last year at a cost of $7.5 million. There was no evidence to suggest they had saved the government money by avoiding prison sentences and stopping people committing further crimes, he said.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said yesterday the changes would not discriminate against lower income defendants, because anyone could still get family or friends to speak about their circumstances in court.
However, criminologist and Section 27 report writer Dr Juan Tauri disagreed, saying lawyers would still get reports written for some clients: "Those who can afford them - which will not be working class or poor Māori, Pākehā, Pasifika."
Bar Association criminal committee co-chairperson Rachael Reed KC said the reports allowed judges to consider the appropriate sentence, chances of successful rehabilitation and what support was available to achieve this.
"Currently, offenders who qualify for legal aid can apply for funding for the preparation of a report. The government has announced that it is introducing legislation to prevent legal aid from being used to pay for these reports," she said.
"While the government has indicated that the offender will still be able to call on a person to speak to the Court about their background, the reality will be that access to important information will not be as readily available and risks disadvantaging those who cannot afford to pay."
Reed said funding the sentencing reports, where appropriate, helps ensure equal access to appropriate sentencing information for the Court.
Bar Association president Maria Dew KC said there are significant risks that it will make it harder for judges to impose appropriate sentences, undermine rehabilitation and adversely impact reoffending rates.
"These are not the outcomes that the government, the legal profession, or the public want," she said.
RNZ
