Freedom of Expression and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act: Frequently Asked Questions

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form. In New Zealand, this right is protected under section 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA).

It includes the freedom to:

• say what you think about anything and share those opinions
• create and share media, art, films, games, books, and online content
• access information and different viewpoints
• challenge ideas, beliefs, and systems.

Freedom of expression is considered a fundamental right in a democratic society.

In New Zealand, the legal right protected under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA) is freedom of expression, not “freedom of speech”. The right to freedom of expression embraces the concept of freedom of speech – it’s just a wider concept.

People often use the phrase “freedom of speech” in everyday conversation, possibly because in movies, shows, and on social media, a reference to freedom of speech is likely to be connected to the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.  In New Zealand, our law uses the broader concept of freedom of expression.

In New Zealand, it is freedom of expression that is protected, rather than freedom of speech.

The words matter because expression is broader than speech. It includes the freedom to express ourselves through:

• film and television
• games and online content
• art, music, books, and creative works
• journalism and political commentary
• social media posts, memes, and digital communications
• receiving and accessing information and ideas.

Freedom of expression recognises that communication happens in many different forms, not just speech. It protects a wider range of human activity and reflects the many ways people share ideas, opinions, culture, and creativity today.

It also protects everyone’s right to seek and receive information and opinions of any kind, in any form.

Freedom of expression is not just about voicing your opinion aloud or in writing. It also protects:

• creative expression
• artistic and cultural works
• access to information
• receiving different viewpoints and ideas
• digital and visual communication
• protest, satire, and symbolic expression (for example, burning a flag, using the middle finger gesture, or wearing an armband).

This broad protection is important in a modern society where ideas are communicated visually, digitally, creatively, and symbolically, as well as through speech.

Section 14 says:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.”

This protection applies broadly across speech, media, creative works, and communication.

Yes.

While freedom of expression is a fundamental right, it is not unlimited. Under section 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, rights and freedoms can be subject to “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”.

This means that any limits on someone’s freedom of expression must be “justified”. Sometimes, freedom of expression may be limited to protect other important interests, such as preventing serious harm.

Examples of this include laws relating to:

• restricted and objectionable material
• privacy
• defamation
• harassment and threats.

Any limits on freedom of expression must be carefully considered and justified.

Freedom of expression is central to the work of the Classification Office.

The Office operates under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993. This legislation recognises that New Zealanders have the right to access a wide range of content and ideas, while also acknowledging that some content may cause serious harm.

When making classification decisions, the Office must carefully balance:

• the right to freedom of expression
• the potential for content to cause harm
• the purpose and context of content
• the wider public interest.

This means classification decisions are not based on whether content is offensive, unpopular, controversial, or challenging. Instead, decisions are always guided by legislation, evidence of harm, and the legal tests set out in legislation.

The Classification Office cannot restrict or ban content because of political views, criticism, satire, religion, artistic expression, or controversial opinions alone. Controversial, offensive, or unpopular ideas are not automatically objectionable (banned) under New Zealand law.

For content to be restricted or classified as objectionable under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, it must meet a high legal threshold. The Office must consider:

• the content itself
• the dominant effect of the content
• the intended audience
• the purpose and context of the material
• the extent and degree of injury the material may cause to the “public good”.

The threshold for classifying something as objectionable is high.

The Office cannot restrict or ban content solely because it expresses hateful, discriminatory, offensive, or controversial opinions. However, those themes are sometimes present alongside other content that may meet the legal threshold for restriction or banning. This can include content that promotes, supports, or encourages serious harm, violence, criminal acts, or violent extremism.

For example, content containing misogynistic or racist themes or attitudes would not be considered objectionable under New Zealand law. However, these themes are often present in publications that promote and support extreme violence and cruelty. In those cases, it is the broader combination of harmful content and the risk of injury to the public good that may result in restriction or a classification of objectionable.

For more information, see our research on Online Misogyny and Violent Extremism

Under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, content may be restricted or classified as objectionable if it is considered “injurious to the public good”..

This means the Classification Office must consider whether the availability of the material is likely to cause harm.

The Act specifically identifies certain types of highly harmful content, including:

• sexual violence
• child sexual exploitation
• extreme violence or cruelty or torture
• the promotion or support of criminal acts, terrorism, or violent extremism.

The Office also considers the wider context of the content, including the intended audience, and whether the classifiable content is promoted, supported, or encouraged.

Context is a key part of classification decisions.

The same themes or behaviours can have very different impacts depending on how they are presented.

For example:

• The law treats a documentary about terrorism differently from propaganda promoting terrorism.
• The law treats an educational resource about self-harm differently from material encouraging self-harm.
• Violence shown in a historical drama may be treated differently from violence designed to celebrate real life cruelty.

The Office considers the full context of a publication rather than isolated moments.

The Classification Office aims to prevent harm while limiting freedom of expression as little as necessary.

This is reflected in the range of classification tools available under the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, including:

• age restrictions and content warnings (see section 10, section 3A and section 3B of the Act)
• restricted availability (see section 27 of the Act)
• objectionable classifications for the most harmful material (see section 3 of the Act)

We work to support New Zealanders’ ability to exercise their freedom of expression by providing information, guidance, and tools so they can make their own, informed decisions about what they, and their families, watch – without us restricting access. We have a growing number of resources on our website, including:

• Find a Rating – a database of New Zealand ratings and content warnings for films, shows, and video games, which includes many detailed content breakdowns for the most popular and high-profile films and shows in cinemas and on streaming platforms
• Blogs – for parents and the public to help understand and guide tamariki about video games, popular shows, risks to look out for, and more
• Complaints – providing a clear pathway for the public to make complaints about potentially harmful content is an important function of the Classification Office

Research and evidence are an important part of the Classification Office’s work, particularly when assessing emerging harms and changing media environments.

The Office draws on:

• research into media harms and audience impacts, for example:
  • Online Exposure: Experiences of Extreme or Illegal Content in Aotearoa
  • Content that Crosses the Line: Conversations with young people about extremely harmful content online
• psychological and social science evidence, for example:
  • Digital Reflections – Key Findings
  • Online Misogyny and Violent Extremism – Summary Report
• international trends and classification approaches
• community engagement and public submissions
• expert advice where appropriate (see section 21 of the Act)

This helps support consistent, evidence-informed decision making.

There are legal processes that allow classification decisions to be reviewed or reconsidered.

New Zealand law requires the Classification Office to maintain a register of all of our decisions. This ensures transparency for how each decision was reached and how the law was applied.