Repeat violent and sexual offenders are on notice as the Coalition Government brings back the Three Strikes regime. From today, anyone convicted of one of 42 serious violent or sexual offences will face steadily harsher sentences, a move Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee says answers public calls for safer streets and homes.
The Sentencing (Reinstating Three Strikes) Amendment Act 2024 revives the policy axed by the previous administration. Its framework is simple: a first-time offender receives a formal warning; a second-time offender is jailed with no chance of parole; and a third-time offender must serve the offence’s maximum term, also without parole.
New crimes such as strangulation and suffocation have been added to the strike list. Officials note that someone convicted of murder on a second strike will spend at least 17 years behind bars, while a third-strike murderer faces a minimum 20-year non-parole period.
The law does leave judges a narrow path to reduce a sentence if it would otherwise be “manifestly unjust”, but any departure must be clearly explained. Limited sentence discounts for a guilty plea also remain, intended to spare victims further trauma and ease court backlogs.
“Tougher penalties are now in place as the Three Strikes law comes into force today and the message is clear. If you commit serious violent or sexual offences, expect to face increasingly severe consequences. New Zealanders have had enough – they want safer streets, safer homes, and a justice system that puts victims first,” Mrs McKee says.
Importantly for offenders already before the courts, earlier strike warnings still count if they match the new criteria. The Ministry of Justice has released guidance so defendants and their lawyers can confirm whether previous convictions activate the tougher schedule.
“Importantly, previous strike warnings still count if they meet the new sentencing threshold – ensuring serious repeat offenders can’t escape accountability. The Ministry of Justice has published guidance to help affected individuals, and their lawyers check for active strikes,” Mrs McKee says.
Officials argue the revived scheme restores predictability for victims while giving persistent offenders every incentive to change course early. Critics, however, warn that mandatory maximums may swell prison numbers and limit rehabilitation options. For now, the Government is adamant that the public’s demand for safety must come first.