In 1999 the Department for Courts provided ACNielsen with a series of eight statements relating to the New Zealand Court system and processes. In 2000 the Department for Courts added another statement. The Department for Courts requested that these statements be used (along with a five point rating scale) to assess the opinions of the New Zealand public of our court system and processes. An additional question was included in the February 2000 survey on whether respondents had been in a court building in the last two years and this was repeated in subsequent measures. Two new question were also added in March 2003, to investigate the perceptions New Zealanders hold in relation to the payment of fines and reparation.
The objectives of this research are to investigate the perceptions New Zealanders hold of our court system and processes, and compare any changes since the previous measures in March 1999, February 2000, February 2001, February 2002, March 2003, March 2004, and March 2005.
This research was commissioned by the Ministry of Justice. The report has been prepared by the research company and the views expressed in it are those of the research company and do not necessarily represent the views of the Ministry of Justice.
Purpose
Specific aims are to look at perceptions regarding:
- Availability of information about the courts.
- Time frame for delivery of services.
- Cost involved in using the courts.
- The manner in which the court process treats people.
- Provision of services to all New Zealanders.
- The importance of the court system to the New Zealand democratic process.
- How modern court systems and processes are seen to be.
- Fair treatment of people within the court system.
- The safety of people in or immediately around court buildings.
- Whether people who have fines can get away with not paying them.
- Whether most people ordered to pay reparation can get away without paying it.
- Whether people had been in a court building within the last two years.
Methodology
The statements for assessment were incorporated in ACNielsen’s Omnibus survey. This surveys a random sample of 1,000 people aged 15 years and over, throughout New Zealand.
The omnibus was conducted using ACNielsen’s CATI service (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing). The questionnaire was formatted on computer prior to interviewing. Interviewers then keyed responses to the survey directly into PCs as they conducted the telephone interview. Routing logic was pre-specified in order to ensure that interviewers followed the correct sequence.
Interviewers worked under full time supervision and the shift supervisor was equipped with both visual and audio monitoring facilities to ensure the highest possible standard of interviewing. Interviewing took place from 1st to the 8th of March 2006 and was conducted between 5pm and 9pm on weekdays and 10am and 8pm on weekends.
Telephone numbers were selected at random from a white pages listing supplied by Telecom. These numbers were issued to interviewers on screen, no answers and engaged numbers were automatically programmed to be reissued. Appointments could also be made and call backs scheduled for convenient times, enabling us to interview the hard to find respondents. At least three calls are made to each phone number before substitution. Respondents are randomly selected using the “next birthday” technique with only one person interviewed per household.
Key Results
Comparing current results with 2005 reveals a positive change in attitudes in the following areas:
- Significantly fewer people agree or strongly agree that there is a lack of information about the services that the courts provide (68% in 2005 compared with 62% in 2006)
- Significantly fewer people disagree or strongly disagree that the courts provide services for all New Zealanders (17% in 2005 compared with 12% in 2006)
- Fewer people tend to disagree or strongly disagree that the court processes treat people with respect (20% in 2005 compared with 18% in 2006)
Comparing current results with 2005 results reveals a negative change in attitudes in the following areas:
- More people tend to agree or strongly agree that most people who have a fine can get away with not paying it (from 45% in 2005 to 48% in 2006)