The former judge sought to avoid “keeping the bereaved at arm’s length”
During his time on the High Court bench, Mark Cooper was appointed to chair the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission, which was established in response to the 6.3-magnitude quake that killed 185 people and injured many in February 2011. While the former judge doesn’t think he’ll be remembered as an innovator, he told NZ Lawyer he was proud of the innovative way the commission handled the work it needed to do.
In the second part of this interview, the Bankside Chambers arbitrator shared the moving experience of listening to people’s experiences in relation to the earthquake and why he felt the Royal Commission was able to respect the need to comply with “the rules of natural justice” in such a situation.
You’ve chaired a Royal Commission and presided over the Court of Appeal – what is one initiative you’ve led that you felt was particularly meaningful to you, and why?
I don’t think I will be remembered as a great innovator. However, I was proud of the way in which the Royal Commission approached its work in Christchurch, which I think was to some extent innovative. Many had died in the earthquake of 22 February 2011, and many had been injured. Some had lost limbs. We had to conduct an inquiry in which we needed to investigate the causes of building failures, and in the course of which we would need to explain as best we could why those failures occurred.
There was a need to preserve our objectivity and conduct a fair process in which people who might have reputations at stake could rely on the Commission’s impartiality. Yet as I saw it, that did not need to be done by keeping the bereaved at arm’s length; they should not be treated as if involved in an adversarial process. Assisted by some magnificent people on the staff of the Royal Commission, I met with anyone who wanted to talk to us about their experiences on the day of the earthquake and the following days during the ongoing search and recovery process. Many did. It was often very moving. We had a lawyer, Marcus Elliott (now a coroner), who was appointed to represent the interests of the bereaved and kept in touch with them throughout the process.
I think it was important to ensure that people felt there was a thorough investigation into what had led to significant loss of life. I was pleased that the Royal Commission was able to function in this way while respecting the need to comply fully with the rules of natural justice.
Last year, you were given the KNZM distinction – what does this accolade mean to you?
It’s reassuring that others have decided that I should be recognised for my service to the judiciary and it also reflects in part the work that all the judges do supporting the rule of law in our country. You try to do the job as well as you can, but you don’t really know how you are going. It’s a kind of validation. My wife and wider family were very pleased by it, and my parents would have been too.
