From: IGIS_Enquiries To: 'Arnaud' <*****************> Subject: RE: False equivalence from Cherly Gwyn's report [unclassified] Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 04:12:22 +0000 Dear Mr Wylie Thank you for your email. I understand from the following passages in your email that you are concerned over the scope of the Inspector-General's jurisdiction both in the conduct of the recent inquiry into the release of information by the NZSIS and in the confidentiality requirements around that inquiry: “… the reference to the legislation implies that it is relevent to the argument for jurisdiction regarding an inquiry into issues of public interest. … The right of inguiry into issues of public interest that is required for jurisdiction concerning those issues does not originate in legislation. By assuming jurisdiction Ms Gywn has assumed pre- eminince in a specific issue of public interest. This affects the legitimacy of an embargo against disclosure because of the assumption of universal jurisdiction where the jurisdiction is in fact only personal.” As you will know, the office of Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security was created in 1996 by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act. In that Act, Parliament has also fixed the powers and procedures of the Inspector-General and any inquiry by the Inspector-General can only be conducted in accordance with those fixed powers and procedures. In particular: - Section 11 of the Act defines when the Inspector-General may conduct an inquiry. The Act does not deal with whether anyone else might inquire into any issue of public interest on any other ground. - Sections 19 and 29 require that any inquiry must be conducted in private and that information from that inquiry may be released only with the prior approval of the Inspector-General and/or the responsible Minister. The Act can be accessed online either through the Inspector-General’s website at http://www.igis.govt.nz or through the New Zealand legislation website at http://www.legislation.govt.nz. I trust that this material is of assistance to you in addressing your concerns. Regards [cid:image001.png@01CFDD63.4E661F10] enquiries@igis.govt.nz www.igis.govt.nz Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security -----Original Message----- From: arnaud@mail.geoz.co.nz [mailto:arnaud@mail.geoz.co.nz] On Behalf Of Arnaud Sent: Friday, 28 November 2014 4:46 p.m. To: IGIS_Enquiries Subject: False equivalence from Cherly Gwyn's report Hello, I wish to adivse Ms Gwyn of an error in her report of November 25 concerning a public interest defamation tort relating to Phil Goff. Since I'm arguing in the public interest it would be appropriate to notify publicly, but I would first like to extend an invitation to a legal cure, with Ms Gwyn as agent. The cure relates to the root cause or causes of the fallacy which is expressed in her report through the following false equivalence: "2. Under section 11(1)(b)(i) of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1996 (IGIS Act) I have jurisdiction to inquire into a complaint by a New Zealand person…" Although Ms Gwyn, not Ms Turei, was responsible for the motion, the reference to the legislation implies that it is relevent to the argument for jurisdiction regarding an inquiry into issues of public interest. The false equivalence in the argument for jurisdiction is that persons and people are not equivalent terms, and yet they are treated as if they were equivalent. Also, from paragraph 5: "5. Jurisdiction for the inquiry is contained in s 11 of the IGIS Act." The right of inguiry into issues of public interest that is required for jurisdiction concerning those issues does not originate in legislation. By assuming jurisdiction Ms Gywn has assumed pre-eminince in a specific issue of public interest. This affects the legitimacy of an embargo against disclosure because of the assumption of universal jurisdiction where the jurisdiction is in fact only personal. Naturally I will interpret a lack of reponse as no contest from the state. Arnaud Wylie. "The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately."