On the night of June 15, 1974, six separate incidents involving violence occurred in Auckland. Four of these incidents took place in the inner city and involved Maoris or non-Maori Polynesians. Suddenly all the prejudices and racist fears of the European community came into the open and demands were made for more police with more powers to deal with this menace. The Labour politicians hesitated briefly, but hysterical newspaper editorials and frantic outbursts from the National MPs of Auckland (representing the conservative white suburbs) made up the Government's mind and the Prime Minister gave the go ahead for the police to form a Task Force to patrol the inner city.

In their eagerness to 'clamp down on Polynesian violence' the white politicians and police chiefs conveniently forgot the other violent incidents which occurred on the night of June 15. One was a combination of fights and assaults on the North Shore and the other a brawl in New Lynn, both of which involved only Europeans. Yet no Task Force was set up to patrol these suburbs, or to arrest the drunken people in and around their pubs and taverns. All that the Task Force was interested in were a few inner city pubs and taxi ranks patronised almost exclusively by Maoris and other Polynesians.

This wasn't the first time the Labour parliamentarians responded to the law-and-order-cry—in November 1973 an earlier Task Force was set up as a result of hysteria in the press about 'inner city street violence'. One notable victim of that Task Force was an innocent 14 year-old Rarotongan schoolboy who was arrested while simply standing on a street corner. He was locked up in Mt Eden Prison and then a Boys Home for a total of four weeks, and had to go through four court appearances over a 2½ month period before he was acquitted of a single idle and disorderly charge. Already it was clear, as Nga Tamatoa had predicted, that the Task Force was concentrating its attention selectively on Maoris and other Polynesians.

The present Task Force was set up within a fortnight of June 15, again with the aim of 'cleaning up the streets'. It is now clear that in its operations to date, during which time at least 80% of all arrests have been of Maoris and other Polynesians, 'cleaning up the streets' has been interpreted by the police as cleaning Maoris and other Polynesians off the streets and into the cells, innocent or not.

ACORD members monitored the Auckland Magistrates Court every Saturday morning for the first six weeks the Task Force was operating. We were able, therefore, to gather data about one sample of the Task Force's victims, those arrested on Friday nights.

These included more than a quarter of the total of 403 people arrested by the Task Force during that period. The six-week monitoring period also covered three weeks before the new national Duty Solicitor Scheme started in Auckland and three weeks after. The aim of this scheme is to provide legal help and legal aid to all defendants in the magistrates courts and childrens courts, and we were interested to see how effective its early operations were.

Who was arrested?

As Inspector Dallow, commander of the Task Force has admitted, over 80% of all Task Force arrests are of Maoris or non-Maori Polynesians. Of course, this is not surprising since the Task Force spends the major part of its time in and around those inner city pubs which are patronised largely by Maoris and other Polynesians. But the figure of 80% is an overall one. We have analysed the arrest figures for each successive week that the Task Force has been on the streets.

The proportion of Maoris and other Polynesians became progressively greater each week. It is inconceivable that this racial group has suddenly become much more prone to drunkenness, obscene language and offensive behaviour. The only conclusion to be drawn therefore, is that the Task Force is to an ever-increasing extent selectively arresting Maoris and other Polynesians.

What were the "offences"?

Of all those who were arrested for drunkenness on Friday nights, 76% were Maoris or other Polynesians. Of all those who were arrested for obscene language and offensive behaviour, 75% were Maoris or other Polynesians. To see just how selective the Task Force really is in its arrests, we have compared the Task Force arrest figures with those for regular police arrests in Auckland. (Based on latest available 'Justice Statistics—1971').

It can be seen that the Task Force has more than tripled the arrests of Maoris and other Polynesians for drunkenness, and has more than doubled the figure for offensive behaviour and obscene language. This is on top of regular police arrest figures which themselves are so high as to indicate bias.

What sort of "justice" was handed out?

Many and probably a majority of the 403 people arrested by the Task Force during its first six weeks were first offenders and were arrested on charges laid under the Police Offences Act. These people were all bailable as of right and on the night they were arrested the police could have released them on bail on their own recognisance, without a surety. In fact, the police very rarely did this. Almost all those arrested by the Task Force on Friday evenings were held in the police cells until their appearance in court next day (12 or so hours later).

In the case of those arrested for drunkenness, only 16% were released on bail, a majority of whom were Pakehas. This failure to bail those arrested for drunkenness is especially unjust. A first offence for drunkenness is not punishable by imprisonment yet most of those arrested for this 'offence' are in fact deprived of their liberty for some time. This situation is worst for Pacific Islanders whose knowledge of English is not good. Because interpreters are usually not present in court on Saturday mornings (nor always on other days) these defendants can be kept locked up for hours if not days longer just waiting while the court takes its time over getting interpreters.

But do those who are first arrested unnecessarily and then denied bail unfairly get any sort of 'justice' when they finally appear before the magistrate? ACORD monitors have sat and watched 172 hearings and the answer can only be 'no'. Some case histories illustrate why.

Case Histories

Drunkenness:

Of the minority of Pakehas arrested for drunkenness most were alcoholics who were unemployed and referred for medical treatment. On the other hand, the Maoris and other Polynesians charged with this "offence' were in most cases young, employed and first offenders.

• A Samoan was brought into the dock and charged with drunkenness. He had been in New Zealand a very short time and understood no English at all. When this became obvious, the magistrate explained the charge to the man—in English—and very kindly entered a Not Guilty plea on his behalf. The man just stood in the page 7 dock shuffling nervously and smiling vaguely. Although it is claimed that defended hearings do not take place on Saturday mornings, this one went ahead without any hesitation. The defendant had no lawyer (the duty solicitor scheme had not started at this time). The police called a constable to give evidence against he the man, which he did—in English. The magistrate then explained to the man—in English—that he could now cross examine the police witness. The man still stood there, saying and comprehending nothing. The magistrate then saw that there was no defence, found the charge proved and convicted and fined the man. The man left the dock having understood nothing (except perhaps, that justice is only available in Auckland to those who are white and speak English).

This report has been compiled by members of the Auckland Committee on Racism and Discrimination (ACORD) and was written by R.A. Galbreath and O.R.W. Sutherland. P.O. Box 47155, Ponsonby

Duty solicitors

The long-awaited government supported national Duty Solicitor Scheme came into operation in the Auckland Magistrates Court three weeks after ACORD members started monitoring Saturday morning sittings of the court. We were able, therefore, to compile 'before' and 'after' figures. Of the 172 cases we observed, 86 were heard before the scheme started and 86 after. Only 6(7%) of the first group had anyone to speak for them in court. Of the second group, however, 41(48%) did, and the duty solicitors accounted for 33 of these. Nevertheless, it is clear that duty solicitors cannot do much for Task Force victims. Most of them are technically guilty of whatever trivial 'offence' they have been arrested for. But because none of the duty solicitors speak any Polynesian language, and they have no interpreters available to them, they are often unable to communicate with a defendant and cannot with any accuracy advise on plea anyway. In fact, 67% of all defendants pleaded Guilty before the duty solicitor scheme got under way, and [unclear: 62%] after—not a significant difference. Not Guilty pleas did not change significantly either, but there was a significant increase of remands without plea (13% to 22%). Such a remand allows the defendant time to obtain legal aid, and may well lead to a Not Guilty plea later.

We welcome the fact that duty solicitors are not just sitting in an office outside the court but are helping defendants in court during their hearings and in some cases pleading in mitigation of penalty. But duty solicitors cannot undo or prevent the injustices which are perpetrated by the Task Force and the magistrates. Only the removal of the Task Force from the streets and radical changes in the judicial process can do that.

Conclusion

The Task Force is racist and is being used by racist politicians as an instrument of oppression against Maoris and other Polynesians. No other conclusion is possible from the evidence we have gathered, taken in conjunction with statements made publicly by the National MPs of Auckland, in particular those made by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Muldoon. As Mr Muldoon's calls identifying Maoris and other Polynesians as the 'problem' have been made with increasing stridency over the period of our survey, so too has the arrest rate of this racial minority group shot up to over 80% of all Task Force arrests. Yet, it is inconceivable that Maoris and non-Maori Polynesians have suddenly become so much more prone to drunkenness, or obscene language or 'offensive behaviour' over this brief six-week period. The arrest situation can therefore only have resulted from a deliberate effort on the part of the Task Force to selectively arrest Maoris and other Polynesians, thereby satisfying the demands of those whose prejudice and bigotry leads them to overlook all pakeha crime and pretend that drinking, obscene language and violence is the prerogative of Maoris and other Polynesians.

The Task Force came into being as a result of a hysterical reaction to a small number of cases of street fighting involving Maoris and other Polynesians. To justify its existence, and prove that it was 'cleaning up the streets', the Task Force had to come up with big arrest figures for Maoris and other Polynesians in a short space of time. It did so in the easiest possible way by picking on those who transgressed archaic drunkenness and obscenity laws. This, then, provided the 'proof that Maoris and other Polynesians were indeed the 'problem' and so 'justified' concentrating even more attention on them which, of course, led to more and more arrests. The vicious circle became an even more vicious spiral.

There can be no doubt, no equivocation over our conclusion: in arresting hundreds of Maoris and other Polynesians on trivial charges the Task Force is not preventing violence, rather it is itself perpetrating violence. The oppression of a racial minority group by police is now a reality in Auckland. The Task Force must, therefore, be disbanded immediately.