WARREN v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2017] NZHC 2832 [17 November 2017]

WARREN v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2017] NZHC 2832[17 November 2017]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDWELLINGTON REGISTRYCIV-2017-485-897[2017] NZHC 2832BETWEEN TE TANGATA WHENUA (AS THIRDPARTY AND PERSONALREPRESENTATIVE OF RHYSWARREN)ApplicantAND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THEDEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSRespondentOn the papers: 17 November 2017Counsel: R Warren in personV McCall for RespondentJudgment: 17 November 2017JUDGMENT OF WILLIAMS J[1] This matter came before me on 30 October 2017. It is an application for habeascorpus by a person who calls himself Te Tangata Whenua as a personal and third partyrepresentative of Rhys Warren. They appear to be the same person. It was Mr Warrenwho indicated initially that he would appear in person.[2] I was to hear the matter by teleconference but Mr Warren would not come tothe phone. I was advised he was being disruptive and was relocked in his cell. Idispensed with the teleconference and asked Crown counsel to file a brief affidavitexplaining what had happened.[3] On 31 October, Senior Corrections Officer McBrearty filed an affidavitadvising that at the time he was asked to take the call:Mr Warren became very disruptive and ran around the unit, delivering CDsand other items to other prisoners. He was directed to get on the call with theCourt.Then, he ran to the upper landing of the unit, and continued to deliver itemsto other prisoners. He was abusive towards staff. He was given a finaldirection to get on the call with the Court, but continued to be abusive anddisruptive.Rather than implement a control and restraint procedure either to forceMr Warren to take the Court's call or to stop conducting himself in an abusiveand difficult way, the decision was instead made to re-lock him in his cell (forhis own safety and that of staff).[4] In my minute of 30 October, I gave Mr Warren until the end of the followingday to file written submissions. He did not meet that deadline but on 16 November,he filed written submissions essentially challenging the legitimacy of the current legalorder and therefore his incarceration; and suggesting he is not the person in whosename he is incarcerated.[5] I am satisfied that this application for a writ of habeas corpus must bedismissed. The warrant pursuant to which Mr Warren is detained is valid. He isserving a sentence of preventive detention, a sentence handed down by Brewer J on11 August 2017.[6] Crown counsel refers to authorities both with respect to Mr Warren's claimeddual personality, and with respect to the challenge to jurisdiction. Without needing torefer to any of them, I find that neither argument has any prospect of success.[7] The application is dismissed accordingly.Williams JSolicitors:Crown Law, Wellington for RespondentCc Mr R Warren, Rimutaka Prison