Dear Editor, “When you expect the worst, you will never be disappointed!”

As for me I see that there are many shortcomings in the administration of justice here in the Cook Islands.

I have for some time expressed my view that the system has bypassed the requirement to hold open Coronial Inquests into deaths where a doctor has not issued a death certificate.

I also see that in articles published in this paper that two of our local JPs are referred to as coroners when the truth is they do not come within the definition of a coroner according to Section 3 of the 1979-80 Coroners Act.

I don’t see any amendment to this Act that allows for their inclusion.

While I have your attention, what is happening with the ‘Juvenile Crime Prevention Committee’. This body was apparently set up to deal with young offenders coming under the notice of the police. In a Cook Islands News article dated 10 May 2024, the issue was raised due to a backlog of cases police have prepared for prosecution. This obviously is a failure of the justice system, in bringing offenders irrespective of age, to justice as soon as possible.

For my money, if it doesn’t work, scrap it. Let the police and the courts get on with their job.

Talking about over-the-top laws, I notice that most bicycle riders don’t wear a helmet. The law dictates they should. Either enforce the law or drop it.

I now turn your mind to this new anti vape and tobacco legislation.

Our Health Inspectors, soon to be called “Authorised Officers”, really have the job ahead of them. Checking premises for the right licence, to making sure that 18 – 20-year-old, aren’t buying cigarettes. It seems to me, those in this age group, will need proof of age every time they want to smoke.

There are a lot of other issues that trouble me about the Act, but what about the fines? It seems that it is not an offence to smoke in a public place but rather failing to stop smoking when warned. My guess this happens when an “Authorised Officer” is out and about. But, if the request is ignored by the perpetrator, he or she is issued with a $500 fine, that is payable within 7 days.

Upping the ante, it’s a $1000 fine for an owner/operator of government buildings and other places people may gather for failing to take reasonable action to prevent a person smoking in a public place. This offence is confusing and vague. For instance, who is it that oversees the area or public place as mentioned in the amendment referred to in paragraph 12 (a) of the Bill.

Whoever this unspecified person is, he has 7 days to pay or else its off to court.

I urge anyone who is interested in the fine details of the Act, to look for any other anomalies I haven’t covered.

I am dead against smoking, albeit tobacco or vapes, but this piece of legislation is wrong in so many ways.

However, in the event, you want to challenge any of it in court and are fortunate enough to succeed, Section 36B of the Act, specifically states you can not claim costs, even when the charge(s) are withdrawn.

Rod Henderson