The party has announced that, if re-elected, it will mandate that consent be actively communicated, requiring a clear “yes” rather than merely the absence of a “no”.
Paul Goldsmith, the Justice spokesperson, stated that this “yes” could be expressed through words or actions, and emphasized that silence does not equate to consent.
“In contrast to other jurisdictions we frequently compare ourselves to, New Zealand law currently lacks a clear definition of consent. Instead, the Crimes Act lists situations where consent is not present,” Goldsmith explained.
He further added, “This change would bring the law in line with the principles we’ve been teaching our children: that explicit consent is necessary each and every time, rather than making assumptions.”
Goldsmith noted that in legal proceedings, it would remain the prosecution’s responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that consent was not provided, and that the accused did not have reasonable grounds to believe it was.
“This initiative is not just about court proceedings. Defining consent clearly helps judges and juries, and resets societal norms to understand sex as a mutual choice,” Goldsmith remarked.
He also mentioned that National’s proposal on sexual consent builds upon the party’s commitments to abolish good character discounts in sentencing for sexual offences and to empower sexual violence victims to decide on permanent name suppression for offenders.
This proposal follows a bipartisan effort to reform sexual consent laws led by Labour MP Camilla Belich, which reportedly collapsed when National withdrew its support to promote its own policy.
