Christchurch mosque shooting: Royal Commission to begin looking at evidence next week You can see this is partially to appease Fianz’s wish to have a sharia complaint society: The FIANZ terms for the Royal Commission: Seek out RATs!
The Royal Commission set up to look into the circumstances around the Christchurch mosque shooting which killed 51 people will start looking at evidence next week.
Former diplomat Jacqui Caine, the former New Zealand Ambassador to Chile and most recently Te R?nanga o Ng?i Tahu director of special projects in Christchurch, will join Commission chairman Sir William Young.
“The Government is confident that the Royal Commission now has the right people in place to carry out the important task of fully understanding what happened in the lead-up to the March 15 terror attack, what could have been done to stop it and how we can keep New Zealanders safe,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said.
The Commission was scheduled to begin considering evidence from Monday and was due to report back by December 10.
Caine resigned from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to take up the role.
“This is a critical part of our ongoing response to the attack. The Commission’s findings will help to ensure such an attack never happens here again,” Ardern said.
The Commission will look at:
The alleged gunman’s activities before the attack, including:
• Relevant information from his time in Australia.
• His arrival and residence in New Zealand.
• His travel within New Zealand and internationally.
• How he obtained a gun licence, weapons and ammunition.
• His use of social media and other online media.
• His connections with others in New Zealand and internationally.
• What relevant state sector agencies knew about him and his activities before this attack; what actions, if any, they took in light of that knowledge; and whether there were any additional measures the agencies could have taken to prevent the attack.
• Whether there were any impediments to relevant state sector agencies gathering or sharing information relevant to the attack, or acting upon such information, including legislative impediments.
• Whether there was any inappropriate concentration or priority setting of counter-terrorism resources by relevant state sector agencies prior to the attack.
