In 2020 this law was amended so that only persons serving a sentence of imprisonment for a term of three years or more are disqualified from voting.
Prisoners were expressly excluded from registration for voting where they were serving a sentence for "any treason, felony, or infamous offence".
[4] The Electoral Act 1905 changed the scope of enfranchisement, removing the 12 month post-imprisonment disqualification period, but widening the ambit of what kind of prisoner would be disqualified.
By 1977, the law had reverted to the original 1956 position of complete disenfranchisement for anyone serving a custodial sentence at the time of an election.
"[12] The select committee received a large number of submissions on the Bill, with the majority being opposed to the legislation's passage.
The legislation was not retrospective in effect, so any prisoners who were convicted to a less than three-year sentence before the enactment of the new law, would still be allowed to vote.
This drafting oversight was amended by way of supplementary order paper, as it would have completely undermined the point of the legislation if enacted in that form.
[citation needed] Paul Quinn based his justification for the legislation loosely on social contract theory.
This was the view advanced by many supporting members in their speeches but perhaps put most clearly by Jonathan Young during the bill’s Third reading.
[20] There was, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, an inconsistency between the Bill and section 12 of NZBORA, which affirms the voting rights of New Zealand citizens.
[34] The court found that there was no way to read the section in a manner consistent with the NZBORA, however, because of s 4 of that Act, the provision must still be applied in full.
[35] It was also held that it would be difficult to say that the provision was in line with New Zealand's international law obligations, and that it was likely to be inconsistent with the Treaty of Waitangi, although the court did not have jurisdiction to rule on that matter.
In the decision Taylor v Attorney-General on 24 July 2015 Justice Heath in the Auckland High Court issued a formal declaration that the blanket ban on prisoners' voting was inconsistent with section 12(a) of the Bill of Rights.
[38] The appeal to the finding that the 2010 blanket ban was inconsistent with the section 12(a) of the Bill of Rights was dismissed on 26 May 2017 in Taylor v Attorney General NZCA 215.
Additionally, the appellant was made to pay the second to fifth's respondents' costs for a complex appeal on a Band A basis with usual disbursements.
The Tribunal further found that the Crown has failed in its duty to actively protect the right of Māori to equitably participate in the electoral process and exercise their tino rangatiratanga individually and collectively.