The government has announced its intention to reinstate a total ban on voting for all sentenced prisoners, reversing electoral reforms introduced in 2020. The decision was confirmed by Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith this morning.
Goldsmith revealed the proposal as part of an upcoming Electoral Amendment Bill due to be introduced later in 2025. The reinstated ban will apply to all prisoners serving custodial sentences, regardless of the length of their term. However, the law will not apply retrospectively. Prisoners already serving sentences of less than three years when the legislation comes into force – expected before the 2026 General Election – will still be permitted to vote. Additionally, individuals on remand or home detention will retain their voting rights.
The change undoes reforms made under the Labour government in 2020, which restored the right to vote for prisoners serving sentences shorter than three years. The government at the time justified the move as a means of aligning with human rights obligations and fostering rehabilitation.
Goldsmith criticised that approach, describing it as emblematic of a “soft-on-crime” stance. “Citizenship brings rights and responsibilities. People who breach those responsibilities to the extent that they are sentenced to jail temporarily lose some of their rights, including the right to vote,” he said. He framed the ban as a measure to reinforce the rule of law and societal accountability. “A total prison voting ban for all sentenced prisoners underlines the importance that New Zealanders afford to the rule of law, and the civic responsibility that goes hand-in-hand with the right to participate in our democracy through voting,” he added.
In an interview on Mike Hosking Breakfast, Goldsmith acknowledged that reinstating the ban is unlikely to impact electoral outcomes due to the small number of votes involved. “It’s about sending a signal to people who breach the rights and responsibilities of living in society,” he said, as reported by NewstalkZB. Nonetheless, the symbolic weight of the policy is considerable and is seen by many as a statement about the government’s broader law-and-order agenda.
The announcement is expected to reignite long-running debates over the ethical and legal dimensions of prisoner disenfranchisement. Critics have pointed to potential breaches of international human rights conventions and concerns over the disproportionate impact on Māori, who are significantly overrepresented in New Zealand’s prison population. The issue of whether such a ban aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations is also likely to be raised.
Legal experts have previously questioned the constitutionality of blanket disenfranchisement. In 2015, the High Court declared that the 2010 version of the ban, then also applied to all prisoners, was inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. The Court noted that the law disproportionately affected Māori and failed to meet the standard of justified limitation on fundamental rights.
The government insists that its approach balances civic accountability with rehabilitation. Goldsmith stated that full electoral rights would be restored to individuals upon release, and that existing efforts to support re-enrolment by the Department of Corrections and the Electoral Commission would continue.
While the number of affected voters is small, the policy’s return carries broader implications for how New Zealand conceptualises the link between punishment and citizenship. The decision signals a pivot away from rehabilitation-focused justice policies toward a model more heavily emphasising personal responsibility and consequences.