A government watchdog that investigates possible wrongful convictions is calling for stricter rules around eyewitness identification evidence. Its report has been tabled in Parliament and sent to Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (Te Kāhui Tātari Ture) made three recommendations and wants changes to the Evidence Act 2006 to make eyewitness evidence more reliable. The changes would bring New Zealand's law into line with current scientific research and what other countries already do.

Chief Commissioner Denis Clifford led the inquiry. It was the Commission's first look at a broad problem across the justice system rather than a single case.

The scale of the problem shows up in the Commission's own work. Nearly one in five applications it received in its first five years involved issues with eyewitness identification. When the Commission started its inquiry on 13 March 2024, two of the three cases it had sent back to the courts involved problematic eyewitness evidence.

Think of it this way: if a witness picks someone out of a police lineup, that can be powerful evidence in court. But decades of research show human memory is not as reliable as people think, especially when someone is asked to identify a stranger they saw briefly, often under stress.

Problems with identification evidence have shown up in some of New Zealand's most well-known wrongful conviction cases, including Teina Pora, Alan Hall, and Gail Maney. The Commission also cited George Moulden and David Dougherty.

The Commission first raised concerns about identification evidence in 2022. It published a paper in early 2023 titled "Eyewitness identification evidence in Aotearoa" and launched a formal inquiry in March 2024. An expert panel was appointed to help.

The Commission was set up on 1 July 2020, modelled on a similar body in the UK. Its job is to independently investigate cases where someone may have been wrongly convicted and send those cases back to the courts if needed.

The report now sits with Goldsmith. The three recommendations will need Parliament to pass new laws to take effect.

The broader context here is that eyewitness identification has been a known weak point in criminal justice systems for decades. Countries including England and Wales, Canada, and parts of Australia have already changed their rules in response. New Zealand's law has provisions for identification evidence but has not been reviewed in this way before by a body with the Commission's direct experience of wrongful conviction cases.

The Commission's findings matter because they come from real case files, not theory. The one-in-five figure shows the problem is not just a few old cases — it keeps coming up in current work.

Whether the Government acts is up to the Minister and Cabinet. The Commission cannot force law changes. But because the report was tabled in Parliament, the findings are now public. Select committees, opposition MPs, and lawyers can all use them if evidence law is reviewed in future.

The Commission has published information about its inquiry at ccrc.nz/news/systemic and ccrc.nz/information/inquiry-into-eyewitness-identification-evidence.