THE EDITOR of the Dominion, Richard Long, advised other countries which were keen on following in the footsteps of New Zealand in coming up with a Privacy Act, to take a closer look at the legislation before emulating it.
He said New Zealand's Privacy Act did not create a proper balance between the right to privacy and the right to a free flow of information which Long said "could be bad for our democracy for the future".
Speaking at he second Commonwealth Editors' Forum, Long said he was concerned with a statement by a Canadian privacy commissioner in Wellington recently that New Zealand's privacy legislation was a model for the rest of the world to follow.
"I hope you will see that it is exactly the opposite. It is a prime example of how not to do it and those countries that have yet to enact privacy laws should take careful note of our experience and ensure that as far as possible you do not repeat it in your country," Long said in his talk at the three-day forum which will end today.
The forum, organised by the Commonwealth Press Union, is attended by 65 senior editors from 36 Commonwealth countries.
Long said the New Zealand Government drew the line between press freedom and privacy in 1993 with the passing of the Privacy Act.
"I am here today to tell you that, unfortunately, we didn't draw it very well.
"We drew it in a confusing and conflicting way with a single-minded focus on privacy, and didn't take enough account of the critical importance of freedom of information in our society," he said.
Long said people in the newspaper industry originally fought tooth and nail against the very concept of the Act.
he gave the case of mental nurse Neil Pugmire as an example of the "ludicrous outcome" of an overly legalistic interpretation of the Act.
Long said Pugmire was frustrated at being ignored when he tried to raise the alarm over the impending release of a dangerous patient.
He wrote to an opposition MP who raised the matter in Parliament.
Following an inquiry, Pugmire was found to have breached the Act and in doing so had caused the patient "significant humiliation and loss of dignity".
Pugmire was found to be at fault for giving the information to someone who was unable to act on the matter, apparently overlooking the fact that the nurse had been trying to warn the Health Minister of the loophole which would enable the patient's release.
Long said Pugmire's fears proved justified. The patient kidnapped a 12-year-old boy and tried to violate him at knifepoint.
"Cases such as that of Neil Pugmire encourage those who might otherwise come forward with information to keep their heads down for fear of breaking a law that they understand little about.
"The effect is a creeping suppression of information which should belong in the public domain and which in many cases could be released without breaching the privacy principles in the Act," he said.
