Editorial: Surprise Waihopai verdict

OPINION: The acquittal of the three Waihopai activists will have astounded many New Zealanders, and for good reason.

The jury verdict was reached despite the trio admitting that they broke into the spy base run by the secretive Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) and slashed a dome covering a satellite dish.

They pleaded not guilty, however, and argued that they believed the spy base caused human suffering and this made their actions legal.

This has been popularly labelled a "greater good" defence and analogies have been drawn with its successful use by anti-war protesters in Ireland, who damaged a United States Navy plane.

In reality the key defence was a "claim of right", with the defendants arguing they genuinely believed that their actions had been legal.

The question now is whether the decision will set a precedent. Legally, a decision by a district court jury does not create a precedent.

But it is likely that others charged with offences related to a cause which they passionately believe in will attempt to use the Waihopai defence.

An example might be an anti-abortionist charged with damaging a hospital where abortions were performed.

The prospect that the Waihopai case really will be successfully used by others is doubted by some legal experts. The jury presumably reached its verdict because the jurors decided that it had not been disproved that the defendants had genuinely, if mistakenly, believed that they had a legal defence.

But because the trial had shown that their actions had been unlawful, it might be difficult for future defendants to argue that they had mistakenly believed the greater good justified illegal behaviour.

The trial judge did reserve a question of law relating to the claim-of-right defence and this may give the Crown a mechanism to appeal the acquittal, and an opportunity to clarify this aspect of the justice system.

After the Waihopai trial, the acquitted trio continued to defend their actions, but used some curious arguments to do so.

One argued that by shutting down, albeit temporarily, the flow of information from the base they had ultimately helped to save lives in Iraq. Quite how this claim could be substantiated was naturally not explained.

Another said that their actions had shown New Zealanders that there was a US spy base in their midst.

Yet most people have known of the existence of the spy base for many years, certainly since activist Nicky Hager published his book Secret Power in 1996, which claimed that Waihopai was intimately linked into a US-led intelligence network.

There was, though, one major feat achieved by the three protesters. The unlikely trio of a farmer, a friar and a teacher managed to deeply embarrass the GCSB by breaking into its supposedly high-security spy base, which was protected by three fences, alarms and motion censors.

The acquittal of the three defendants who staged this raid has naturally delighted the peace movement.

For many other New Zealanders, however, the verdict will leave a sour taste as they will see it as allowing three people who admitted breaking into a sensitive installation and damaging it to escape the consequences of their actions.

- © Fairfax NZ News