Criminal justice

Contents:

The District Court and High Court are known as courts of general jurisdiction. They undertake criminal, civil and some appellate work.

Criminal justice proceedings make up most of the work of New Zealand’s courts. Criminal trials are heard in the District Court, Youth Court and High Court.[33] Appeals for criminal cases are heard in the appellate courts – the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court – see also the section on “Appellate Courts”.

There is a general trend towards criminal trials becoming longer and more complex. This year, the average number of days per trial rose to a historically-high level – 17.17 days. When compared to 2021 (when the average was 14.4 days per trial) this represents a 19 per cent increase. Reasons include the rise in number of multiple-defendant trials, an increase in the evidence submitted that must then be tested in court (particularly evidence collected from electronic devices), and an increased number of charges for each defendant.

In addition, there has been a rise in the number of trials for the most serious offending – Category 4 offences (murder, manslaughter, and attempted murder) – which now account for 76 per cent of all new criminal trials in the High Court. For comparison, in 2021 these made up 56 per cent of new criminal trials. Although this has not meant that the overall number of criminal trials “in hand” in the Court is higher – in fact, this number reduced in 2024 from 162 to 155 – it has meant that the court is unable to take many “protocol” cases from the District Court, placing pressure on that court.

Despite these trends, the time for a case to come to trial in the High Court’s criminal jurisdiction has reduced and is back to pre-pandemic timeliness in most centres (but see “Courtroom availability for the High Court” on this page for exceptions). It is noted that in the High Court, the optimal time for a case to come to trial is not less than 12 months – the time required by parties to prepare for a complex criminal trial.

High Court | Te Kōti Matua

The High Court deals with the most serious criminal cases including murder, manslaughter, attempted murder, and serious sexual, drug and violent offending. It conducts all sentencings in which preventive detention is a possible outcome. Some cases may be heard in either the High Court or the District Court. The Criminal Procedure Act 2011 provides for a protocol that is intended to ensure that trials involving allegations of the most serious offending, or of the greatest procedural difficulty, are heard in the High Court, if resources allow. However, due to limitations on both the number of courtrooms available and the number of judges, the High Court is unable to provide timely hearings for protocol cases, even for the most serious matters.[34] The Court also has an appellate function, hearing appeals from judge-alone trials in the District Court and Youth Court. It does not hear appeals from District Court jury trials – these are heard in the Court of Appeal. See “Appellate Courts” for more on the High Court’s appellate jurisdiction.

Courtroom availability for the High Court
The limited availability of courtrooms in the High Court circuit courts such as Whangārei and Rotorua affects the High Court’s ability to schedule trials and causes significant delays. For example, there is only one courtroom available to the High Court at Whangārei to deal with all civil and criminal work in Northland. This constraint is delaying the conduct of criminal jury trials in the Whangārei High Court, with the result that hearing dates are being scheduled well in excess of the 12-month timeframe that is generally required to bring a case in the High Court to trial.

The judiciary relies on the Ministry of Justice for the provision of courtrooms. The Chief Justice has raised the delays caused by the shortage of courtrooms in Whangarei and elsewhere with the Minister of Justice on previous occasions. She continues to do so. She briefed the (then) incoming Attorney-General on the issue.

To reduce the impact of these constraints, in both regions the Court’s workload is actively managed by the designated List Judge and registry scheduling team. Earlier trials that may or are likely to resolve are closely monitored, so that trials set further out can be brought forward as the earlier trials resolve.

District Court | Te Kōti-ā-Rohe

Every person in New Zealand who is charged with a criminal offence makes their first appearance in the District Court, even if their charge is ultimately heard in the High Court. In a typical year, more than 107,000 new criminal cases enter the District Court.

The priorities for the District Court are to: enhance the quality of justice (the Te Ao Mārama initiative), improve timely access to justice; increase levels of judicial wellbeing (in particular by addressing workload pressures on judges); and support the design and introduction of the new digital case management system, Te Au Reka.

Much of the work of the judicial leadership of the court, including the executive judges in each location, relates to these priorities, in addition to managing the daily business of the court.

The number of new cases entering the court has been decreasing. The age of cases at disposal fell in 2024. Disposal times had been rising in the District Court in recent years, the contributing factors being:[35] an increase in the number of serious and complex Category 3 cases before the courts;[36] more defendants electing a trial by jury instead of by judge alone; and defendants entering guilty pleas later in the court process. The extra court events needed before a late guilty plea is entered increase the workload of the court.

Initiatives that the District Court is leading and collaborating on to address delay are covered below.

Judicial officers in the District Court

In addition to District Court judges with general or jury warrants, community magistrates and judicial justices of the peace (JJPs) also play an important role in carrying out District Court criminal work. Community magistrates generally sit in urban courts and preside over a wide range of less serious criminal cases. JJPs preside over some preliminary hearings and bail applications. They hear and sentence in minor cases.

There are 18 community magistrates and two acting community magistrates located in nine courthouses, and more than 170 JJPs who sit nationwide.

Te Ao Mārama - Enhancing Justice for all

Te Ao Mārama (the world of light) is the new operating model being implemented in the District Court. It has two main goals – to support fair hearings by ensuring full participation of all parties, and to address root causes of offending (in criminal cases) or conflict (in family cases) by connecting defendants and whānau with community and government agencies that can support positive change.

It draws together the best-practice, solution- focused judging principles that have been developed in the Youth Court and specialist courts within the District Court over the course of 40 years.

Te Ao Mārama benefits everyone who attends the District Court, regardless of their ethnicity, culture, abilities, who they are or where they are from. It must be effective for Māori, given the disproportionate representation of Māori in the family violence, care and protection and criminal jurisdictions of the court.

Te Ao Mārama is being progressively implemented in the family, youth and criminal jurisdictions in eight District Court locations (Kaitāia, Kaikohe, Whangārei, Hamilton, Tauranga, Gisborne, Napier and Hastings), with allocated government funding to support community-based service provision in these courts. The Ministry of Justice has commissioned an evaluation of the effectiveness of these eight Te Ao Mārama courts, and the outcome will determine whether additional funding is sought to support community-based service provision in other courts.[37] In the meantime, other locations are adopting elements of the Te Ao Mārama framework. Te Ao Mārama approaches that are being adopted in courts include:

Creating connections with local communities.
Ensuring that people have the opportunity to contribute to the proceedings that affect them, and that they feel heard in the courtroom.
Improving the quality of information that judicial officers get to inform their decisions.
Improving processes for victims and complainants.
Reducing formality and using plain language.
Alternative courtroom layouts.

Te Ao Mārama operates within the framework of existing legislation including the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Bail Act 2000 and the Sentencing Act 2002. It does not require any new legislation, instead being given effect through new behaviours, new information, new services and new processes across both the criminal and civil jurisdictions.

Te Ao Mārama and access to justice
People with learning and communication difficulties are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Conditions such as foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, brain injury, and learning difficulties such as dyslexia are prevalent in legal settings, easily missed, and affect the young person’s ability to participate in court proceedings that affect them.

New measures have been developed to improve access to justice for people with these conditions in the District Court, including training for judges, lawyers and registry staff, and the introduction of a new court participation tool that will be piloted in the Porirua Young Adult List Court for six weeks starting in February 2025. Insights from the pilot will inform future projects to increase the accessibility of court proceedings for people with learning and communication difficulties.

Improving timeliness and reducing backlogs in the District Court

In 2024, the District Court introduced new timeliness initiatives that have enabled it to resolve more cases than came in, evidence that in addition to identifying and dealing with backlogs (including some very old cases), courts kept on top of the active caseload.

This reversed a trend in the District Court, where the number of criminal cases waiting to be heard had been growing steeply since 2015.

This has resulted in a reduction of backlogs – 8 per cent nationally in the criminal jurisdiction, and 24 per cent in the Auckland metro area, which is the busiest area.

The District Court’s timeliness initiatives incorporate and build on the Criminal Process Improvement Programme (CPIP), a judicially-led justice sector-wide initiative to improve timely access to justice. It establishes best practice in criminal procedure to ensure all court hearings are meaningful, and to reduce the time it takes to resolve cases, which have been rolled out in 2023 and this year. These have made improvements in areas such as case management, bail applications, same-day sentencing and improved documentation.

Justice sector working together to improve timeliness
In June 2024, Chief District Court Judge Heemi Taumaunu published the Timely Access to Justice Protocol, setting a standard of 90 per cent of criminal cases to be disposed of within category-based timeliness thresholds. The thresholds seek to strike the balance between aspirational objectives and operational realities. If a case is not disposed of within the prescribed threshold, then it joins the backlog.

Coordinated action across the justice sector is yielding results. There are lower adjournment rates, which shows that cases are moving through the courts with fewer delays, despite increases in court inflow, jury trial election rates and the remand and overall prison populations in the Auckland metro region. Reducing adjournments is seen as fundamental to improving timeliness in the District Court.

Leaders across the wider justice sector have agreed to support the District Court to reach the 90 per cent standard by June 2027.

Addressing delay in the courts
The judiciary is keenly aware of the impacts of delay. Addressing the causes of delay is a priority.

Delay in court proceedings is a problem that affects individuals before the courts and those awaiting court determinations or decisions. It also impacts on the public perception of the judicial system and the legitimacy of the courts.

Some causes of delay are systemic, relating to the complexity of the court system and the many agencies and participants involved. Others are due to resource constraints such as the number of available courtrooms. Others are related to external events – such as the pandemic, natural disasters and extreme weather events.

The work of the courts can be dependent upon an entire ecosystem of different agencies and individuals, particularly in the family and criminal jurisdictions. Delay may flow from many different sources, many of them beyond the control of the courts. For example, counsel unavailability, or delay in police disclosure, can cause proceedings to be delayed.

Specialist reports may be needed – for example, from mental health professionals – and all evidence must be disclosed in time for the parties to consider it. Emerging trends that also contribute to delay include more defendants selecting jury trials, trials becoming increasingly complex with more multi-defendant trials and more serious charges, and people entering guilty pleas at a very late stage of proceedings.

A shortage of key personnel including Police prosecutors, defence counsel and psychologists is a contributing factor affecting the timely progression and completion of trials and sentencings in parts of the country.

Information on work underway to address delay and improve timeliness is provided below under individual courts.

Remand prisoners: why delay matters to those remanded in custody awaiting sentencing
New Zealand has a significant remand population. Research shows that spending even a short period on remand in custody has long-lasting effects on a defendant’s life outside of prison – such as the loss of employment and housing – and on their family, in particular their children.

Some remand prisoners will not be convicted once they come to trial, yet will have already spent time, perhaps long periods of time, in prison. Others will be convicted but will receive non-custodial sentences, or sentences that are shorter than their time already spent on remand.

Year ended	Number of prisoners awaiting trial or sentence	Remand prisoners as a % of total prison population
Dec 2024	4,175	41 per cent
Dec 2023	3,930	43 per cent
Dec 2022	3,561 [38]	43 per cent
Dec 2021	2,859	37 per cent
Dec 2020	3,000	35 per cent
Dec 2019	3,613	37 per cent

District Court Annual Report District Court statistics

Youth Court | Te Kōti Taiohi

The Youth Court is a specialist division of the District Court. It deals primarily with offending by young people aged 14 to 17 years. In certain circumstances, the Youth Court also deals with serious offending by children aged 12 to 13 years. Some serious offending by 17-year-olds is transferred to the adult criminal division of the District Court.

Any child or young person charged with murder or manslaughter is dealt with by the High Court.

A unique feature of the Youth Court process is the family group conference, which involves a gathering of the young person, their family, the victim(s), Police Youth Aid, the young person’s youth advocate (lawyer) and other professionals. The parties establish a plan to address the offending and underlying causes, provide for victims’ interests and help the young person take responsibility for their actions.

The Youth Court is led by Principal Youth Court Judge Ida Malosi. It is highly regarded internationally for its innovation and solution- focused judging.

Most young offenders are diverted away from formal court interventions and dealt with by Police Youth Aid officers. This means that the young people who end up in the Youth Court are the most serious offenders. They present to the court with a complex range of issues such as severe trauma, neuro-disability, mental distress, addiction and disengagement from education.

To support judges in identifying and managing these challenging issues, education seminars were delivered this year by Te Kura Kaiwhakawā for Youth Court judges, focused on engaging with neurodivergent people and the importance of a trauma-informed approach to judicial practice. This is part of the court’s response to the Royal Commission’s recommendation 33.

There are 75 designated Youth Court judges (including acting designated judges). In 2024, the court dealt with around 1,611 children and young people on 11,328 charges – which means that there were more cases before the court in 2024 than in any of the previous five years. The biggest increases have been in Waiariki, Manawatū Wairarapa region, and Otago.

Despite this recent rise, there has been a sustained and significant reduction in the number of young people in the youth justice system since the court was established in 1989. The Youth Justice Indicators Summary Report released in December showed that the rate of Youth Court appearances for young people has decreased by 41 per cent in the decade since 2013/2014.[39] This sustained reduction is the achievement of an evidence-based, system-wide response to youth offending and restorative justice. For more information about trends in youth justice, see the Youth Justice Indicators Summary Report, released in December 2024.

Youth Court statistic s

A culturally responsive court
The Oranga Tamariki Act 1989, which created the Youth Court, draws upon tikanga Māori concepts. It emphasises the engagement of whānau to address a young person’s conduct and uses restorative justice principles to support the victim and bring home to the young person the consequences of their offending.

Not all Youth Court proceedings take place in a traditional courtroom. Te Kōti Rangatahi | Rangatahi Courts and Pasifika Courts are held at marae or community venues, and Māori or Pasifika customs and cultural practices are used as part of the court process.

There are 16 Te Kōti Rangatahi nationwide and two Pasifika Courts based in Auckland – in Waitakere and Manukau. These courts were established to address the over-representation of Māori and Pasifika in the youth justice system, a move which has had visible positive effects.

The Youth Court handled more cases in 2024 than in any of the previous five years, with the biggest increases in the Auckland Metro region and Canterbury.

Courthouse safety

Courthouses can be dangerous places. The matters at issue in court buildings are fundamental to people’s lives, and court decisions may affect such vital interests as liberty, people’s connection to their children, and livelihoods. Court proceedings can engage strong emotions.

It is essential that the people who work in and visit our courthouses can do so safely and without fear for their security. The judiciary and the Ministry of Justice have been concerned at a rise in incidents of violence and disruption in our courthouses this year and work has been underway to address security concerns.

The Chief Justice and the Secretary for Justice established a working group to examine courthouse security issues. The group prepared a memorandum of understanding between the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice that makes clear the respective responsibilities of the judiciary and the Ministry regarding security in courtrooms and court precincts. It identifies the operational imperatives required to address safety in courthouses, and sets out a framework for working together to keep people safe in our courthouses.

In March, regular security briefings were extended beyond the judiciary and staff to all people who regularly attend court for work. This includes police and Department of Corrections staff, lawyers, journalists and others.

The Ministry continued its dock upgrade programme, which creates greater separation between defendants in the dock and court participants.

Court security officers
Court security officers have powers under the Courts Security Act 1999 to assist them in their duties at the court. One of the most commonly- used powers is to act in relation to the discovery of potentially dangerous items. Court security staff can take into temporary custody any item that could be a potential weapon and return it to the visitor as they leave. If the item is deemed to be a prohibited offensive weapon, the item will be seized, and the person detained by court security. The item and the person are then referred to the police. In 2024, 600 prohibited weapons were prevented from being brought into court, and another 42,291 items were taken into temporary custody, to be returned when the person left the courthouse.

Previous section: New Zealand's Court system

Next section: Civil justice

Footnotes

[33] Criminal trials for military officers and staff are heard in the Court Martial.

[34] Protocol cases are cases that can be heard in the District Court or the High Court. A High Court judge makes the decision as to which court the case will be heard in, in accordance with a protocol, which is used to ensure that cases involving allegations of the most serious nature or procedural complexity are heard in the High Court, if resources allow.

[35] This sentence has been changed since the report was initially released to reflect that the disposal rate fell in 2024.

[36] Category 3 offences are offences with a maximum penalty of a prison term of two years or more (excluding Category 4 offences).

[37] The Government has committed to continued support for the implementation of Te Ao Mārama in the eight core locations where implementation is well advanced (Kaitāia, Kaikohe, Whangārei, Hamilton, Tauranga, Gisborne, Napier and Hastings). A further $25.3 million of funding previously allocated for future locations has been placed in a tagged contingency fund.

[38] The data for 2021 and 2022 has been updated since the publication of the Chief Justice’s Annual Report 2023. The updated figures are presented here.

[39] Youth Justice Indicators Summary Report, December 2024: https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/research-data/justice-statistics/youth-justice-indicators/