Five Million Voices

Should the statutory maximum number of District Court Judges be increased by one (from 182 to 183 full-time equivalents)?

The bill would amend the District Court Act 2016 to raise the statutory cap on District Court Judges by one full-time equivalent. It was defeated at first reading.

⚡ Taken under urgency

Parliament advanced this bill under urgency (first reading) — moving it through faster than usual, with less time than normal for public submissions.

MPs’ arguments for and against the bill

Why support it
  • The Minister argued the District Court is the busiest court with increasing delays that affect defendants, complainants and access to justice, so an additional judge is needed.
  • Supporters said the extra judge is required to manage the workload expected from the Sentencing reforms and other criminal justice changes.
  • Some members said people in the justice system, from victims to the accused, deserve a timely and effective system regardless of their views on the broader reforms.
Why oppose it
  • Critics argued a single additional judge does not address chronic underfunding, staffing shortages, legal aid gaps or derelict court buildings.
  • Opponents said programmes such as Te Ao Mārama, ReFrame and court digitisation would do more to reduce delays but have been frozen or stalled.
  • Critics argued the bill is tied to sentencing reforms expected to increase sentencing events and imprisonment rather than addressing the causes of crime.

These are claims MPs made in Parliament’s debate — not verified facts.

Full bill summary & link to official bill page

This bill makes a small technical change to the District Court Act 2016, raising the statutory maximum number of District Court Judges from 182 to 183 full-time-equivalent positions. The Act sets a legal ceiling on how many judges can serve on the District Court — New Zealand's busiest court, which handles most criminal and civil cases — so lifting the cap by one simply allows one additional judge to be appointed. It affects the court's capacity and, indirectly, people whose cases are waiting to be heard.

Measures like this are periodic housekeeping used to adjust judicial numbers as workloads change; here the increase is intended to help the court manage its caseload and delays. Supporters argue that even one extra judge adds hearing capacity, helping reduce backlogs and resolve cases faster for defendants, victims and litigants. As a minor administrative change it usually attracts little opposition, though some may question whether a single additional position meaningfully eases court delays, or argue that resourcing pressures need broader investment in the court system.

See the Parliament.nz ↗ site for the full bill.

Oppose (No) Support (Yes)

District Court (District Court Judges) Amendment Bill · Third Reading, 6 Mar 2025
Agreed on the voices — no counted division.