Search

In 2003, New Zealand passed the Prostitution Reform Act (PRA), becoming the first country in the world to decriminalise sex work. Aotearoa/New Zealand's model of decriminalisation is internationally regarded as an ideal model for prioritising sex workers' rights and safety, and is understood to have had several positive impacts in these areas. The decriminalised model is often described as 'full decriminalisation', to distinguish it from legal frameworks which decriminalise sex workers while still criminalising clients and/or third parties. However, an infrequently discussed aspect of the Aotearoa/New Zealand model of 'full' decriminalisation is that it prohibits migrant sex work as an anti-trafficking measure. In this paper I discuss the contradictory nature of Aotearoa/New Zealand's sex work law in relation to the precarious legal status of migrant sex workers. I explore the disconnect between the intention and consequences of this policy, outlining the challenges this poses for sex workers, and those committed to the full realisation of sex worker rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous work has demonstrated that cannabis laws have had a disproportionate impact on Māori, the Indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand. In 2019, the New Zealand Government amended cannabis laws, providing police with the power to determine whether a therapeutic or health-centred approach would be more beneficial than a conviction. In the current study, we use population level data to assess whether this law change has ameliorated the bias in cannabis convictions for Māori. Methods: Data were drawn from the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI), a large government database hosted by Aotearoa New Zealand's national statistics office. In the IDI, we selected individuals who (1) were between 18 and 65, (2) were Māori or Pākehā (New Zealanders of European descent) and, (3) had any cannabis charges that proceeded to the courts. Results: Māori ethnicity was a significant predictor of the odds of receiving a cannabis conviction for Māori males (Odds: 1.56), with a marginally significant effect for Māori females (Odds: 1.57). Further, for Māori, there was no reduction in the number of cannabis charges before vs. after the amendment to cannabis laws. Conclusion: The current study demonstrates that the bias in cannabis convictions for Māori remain. Given this, the New Zealand Government must follow other countries around the world and move forward on cannabis law reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]