Ex-Green MP Darleen Tana says the Green Party and its co-leaders did not abide by its own constitution when it sought to eject her from the party and ultimately from Parliament.
A judicial review of the party co-leaders, Marama Davidson and Chlöe Swarbrick, is being heard in the High Court at Auckland before Justice David Johnstone.
Justice Johnstone later reserved his judgment.
The review is the latest twist in a saga that unfolded in March when migrant worker exploitation allegations at her husband’s business emerged publicly.
The hearing opened, before a full public gallery, with a karakia, before the arguments were heard.
Tana’s lawyer told the High Court the Green Party failed to follow proper procedures, Political Editor Maiki Sherman reports. (Source: 1News)
Tana’s lawyer Sharyn Green told the court she was seeking a legal declaration stating that the Green Party did not abide by its own constitution when it sought to eject her from the party and ultimately from Parliament.
“It’s not that [the process] wasn’t followed, but it was unlawful, I say that in the strongest terms,” Green said.
“It didn’t abide by its constitution and charter.”
Tana is facing party-hopping legislation potentially being used against her – but after she sought an injunction to prevent that, the Green Party held off on that discussion at a planned meeting last month – pending the outcome of today’s judicial review.
Tana’s lawyer said the now-independent MP was motivated to seek the judicial review so that other party members know what can be expected of them in the future.
“She doesn’t want to see this process engaged against anyone else.”
The lawyer said there are two issues in contention: Whether she resigned of her own volition, and what she was asked to resign from – the party, or Parliament.
Green said Tana had resigned in July, but only after being asked to do so, and this was interpreted as stepping aside from the party, not as an MP.
The court heard how the first request for resignation was made by co-leader Davidson on March 14. This followed questions raised by the media after claims of worker exploitation were raised against her husband’s business.
The second request came on July 5 following the release of an independent report the party commissioned into the allegations. Swarbrick wrote to Tana in an email that the Green Party would be meeting and would seek her resignation.
Green says both instances were interpreted by her client as asking for her resignation from the party, not as an MP.
Tana’s lawyer also questioned whether the MP was “asked and pushed” to resign, or did she resign willingly.
“I say she was pushed, she was given no other option.”
Green argues the leaders and the Green Party sought to eject her, even before an independent investigation was launched.
Tana’s lawyer said the leaders, and the party, failed to follow due process when they first sought Tana’s resignation without informing her of the specifics of the complaint; by not convening a committee to raise the allegations with Tana directly; nor giving her a chance to respond.
“Still to this day, she doesn’t know what the standard of conduct was that she’s breached.”
The lawyer also proposed it was “unreasonable” that Tana was being held to account for her husband’s alleged wrongdoing.
And if so, she questioned whether this was an extension of the constitution and the standard of conduct expected under that.
“Are you also going to be culpable for bringing the party into disrepute by your spouse’s conduct, or your child’s conduct?
“Because that’s such an extraordinary interpretation.
“Boris Johnson didn’t stand down as the Prime Minister of England when certain allegations were made against him.”
She also questioned whether the leaders could have supported Tana more, given she had not led the party astray before.
The lawyer claimed the party leaders were more keen on looking good in front of the media, and supporting migrant workers, at the expense of their own MP.
‘No political sense’
In response, Green Party lawyer Tim Smith said it would have made no political sense for the resignation call to be in relation to her party membership, as opposed to her parliamentary role.
“In the political world, it would make no sense at all to as Ms Tana to resign as a member of the party, rather than an MP. One could almost take judicial note that when there is a call for resignation, it’s a call for resignation from office.
“My learned friend referred to Boris Johnson. No-one was suggesting that he should resign as a member of the Conservative Party, rather one should resign as a cabinet minister, as an MP,” Smith told the court.
He said that has greater resonance here, under the MMP system.
“By continuing as an independent MP, despite having resigned, she’s not continuing to work in the interest of the Green Party. By doing that you are denying the Green Party parliamentary funding and resources…and her not being available in the House to vote on legislation.”
Smith said the party effectively “lose control of that MP” despite the fact they are only there on a Green Party ticket.
The lawyer argued irrespective of the process in the lead up to Tana’s resignation, because she has resigned, the consequences of that means the waka-jumping legislation can be invoked.
Smith argued the process was fair and just – and that concerns had been raised with Tana before the initial calls to resign.
The Green Party chief of staff and Davidson met with Tana back in February 1 when the allegations were first raised with the party, and it was Tana who’d first aired the topic of resignation.
“Although my learned friend has tried to characterise this as Mrs Tana unfairly being tainted by association because of the actions of her husband, the complaint is ‘you knew about these things, you knew these were exactly the sorts of things which could create problems in due course and you didn’t bring them to our attention’.”