Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971

Armed Forces Discipline Committee - Administrative provisions relating to Discipline Committee

166C: Voting at meetings

You could also call this:

"How the Discipline Committee makes decisions by voting"

Illustration for Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971

You are a member of the Discipline Committee. You have one vote. The chairperson has one vote like you, and an extra vote if everyone else's votes are equal. When deciding on sentencing guidelines, the Chief of Defence Force, the Judge Advocate General, and other members present must agree with a majority vote.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM2098973.

This page was last updated on — View changes

Topics:
Government and voting > ElectionsGovernment and voting > Government departmentsCrime and justice > Criminal law
Previous

166B: Other procedure at meetings, or

"What happens at Discipline Committee meetings"

Next

166D: Protection from liability, or

"Committee members are not personally responsible for their decisions"

Part 8AArmed Forces Discipline Committee
Administrative provisions relating to Discipline Committee

166CVoting at meetings

  1. Each member of the Discipline Committee has 1 vote.

  2. In addition to his or her general vote, the chairperson has, in the case of an equality of votes, a casting vote.

  3. A decision whether or not to finalise any sentencing guidelines must be decided by a majority vote of the Chief of Defence Force, the Judge Advocate General, and any other members present.

Notes
  • Section 166C: inserted, on , by section 44 of the Armed Forces Discipline Amendment Act (No 2) 2007 (2007 No 98).