The Greens were the only party to vote against the Amendment Bill, Hughes reminded the protestors. "The Labour party thundered about how they were fundamentally opposed to [suspension of an offender's internet access], then they voted for the Bill." The suspension provision has for the time being been held in abeyance, but can be brought into effect by an Order in Council.

Suspension is a disproportionate response to a civil, not criminal, offence, Hughes said, and despite late rewording of the clause on the burden of proof, the legislation still effectively pronounces a defendant "guilty until you prove your innocence. This is a fundamental change to New Zealand law," he said.

Wingate complained at length of poor treatment at the hands of a major bank, government officials and judiciary over a land deal in the 1990s, citing it as an argument that Crown and judicial immunity should be abolished.

Attendees listened politely but afterwards expressed some discontent that the proceedings had been diverted away from the file-sharing and copyright question, One Facebook poster, however, contended that more fundamental matters of law are at stake and it is a mistake to hammer a single issue. "Whenever most people hear [copyright-centred complaints] they will immediately think 'well they just wanna [sic] download free stuff'. The problem is a lot deeper than this," he wrote.

Another independently organised demonstration is provisionally planned for August and the organisers of this one promise a more on-topic discussion, including addresses from members of the NZ Pirate Party.