Greenpeace Wins Charity Case in Supreme Court
Campaigning organisations can register as charities, the Supreme Court ruled this afternoon.
The ruling comes after a long-running court battle waged by Greenpeace.
Today, the Supreme Court overruled the Court of Appeal, saying that that charities can engage in political activities.
Bunny McDiarmid, Greenpeace’s executive director, said: “This decision makes New Zealand democracy a little stronger. It means that the Supreme Court has now recognised that trying to change our world for the better, and taking on government to do that, is a public good.
“This has been a legal marathon, and it’s great to see that New Zealand democracy took out the gold.”
June 2008: Greenpeace New Zealand apply to the Charities Commission to be registered as a charity.
April 2010: The Charities Commission declines Greenpeace’s application. The Commission said that, although the bulk of Greenpeace’s purposes and activities, such as the promotion of the protection and preservation of nature and the environment, were charitable, the promotion of disarmament and peace would not be charitable.
December 2010: Greenpeace appeal to the High Court.
May 2011: The High Court finds that Greenpeace should not be able to register as a charity because the organisation’s nuclear disarmament purposes were independent political purposes and therefore non-charitable.
September 2012: Greenpeace head to the Court of Appeal.
November 2012: The Court of Appeal agrees with Greenpeace, and says that the organisation’s peace and disarmament purposes were broadly charitable and the Charities Commission (now called the Charities Services) should consider the application again. The Court agreed that political advocacy did not disqualify an organisation from being a charity, as long as it was not a ‘primary purpose’. The Court also said that any activities carried out by a charity that were illegal would preclude that organisation from being a charity.
14 May 2013: Greenpeace heads to the Supreme Court to challenge two of the Court of Appeal’s findings, arguing that restrictions should not be put on political advocacy, as it is not consistent with New Zealand’s participatory democracy for there to be a general prohibition on participation. The organisation also questioned whether the Court was able to judge where public benefit lies around political advocacy.
6 August 2014: The Supreme Court hands down its decision.
Copies of the the decision can be found on the Supreme Court Website here.
Previous page: What We Do