[ad_1]
A campaign to lower the voting age to 16 years failed to convince a judge in a preliminary legal argument seeking to further the cause.
The campaign had wanted a Superior Court judge to declare that the current minimum voting age of 18 discriminates on the basis of age.
Any decision to lower the minimum voting age would be in the hands of Parliament, but a judge’s statement would have helped clarify the law.
In a decision issued by the High Court in Wellington on Wednesday, Judge Jan-Marie Doogue said that restricting voting to 18-year-olds was a justified limit to the right to be free from age discrimination.
READ MORE:
* The Detail: Teen Campaign Says Lowering the Voting Age Would Lead to ‘Stronger and Fairer Democracy’
* Campaign to vote at 16 and 17 years, claims age discrimination
* Election 2020: One month late, hundreds of young people can now vote in the next election.
* The ‘Make it 16’ campaign is launched, taking the case of the voting rights of 16-year-olds to court
He said other New Zealand laws draw the dividing line between adults and children at 18, it is within the range of reasonable alternatives and the vast majority of countries have a voting age of 18.
The issues were complex and broad political work would be needed before it could be decided that the voting age could be changed, he said.
The law is contradictory in saying that the right to vote is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights for citizens over 18 years of age, but the right not to be subject to age discrimination applies to those over 16 years of age.
A vote in the 2020 general election included weighing in on referenda on legalizing recreational cannabis use and end-of-life choice.
Monique Ford / Stuff
Make It 16 Campaign Co-Chairs Dan Harward Jones, front left and Gina Dao-McLay, front right, with from left: Jackson Graham, Lily Stelling, Rebecca Matijevich, Ella Flavell, Pierson Palmer, Olivia Trass. (File photo)
The judge said debate over voting age should be encouraged and that it has increased in recent years.
“Age can be an imperfect indicator of maturity or competence; there will always be precocious children above and incompetent adults below the line wherever it is drawn. “
But a “bright line” was reasonable in setting the limit for the general population, he said.
