to interpret and apply the meaning of laws passed by Parliament.  Coupled with the common law powers Courts have always exercised in New Zealand, the Act gives  to  our  courts  what  is  sometimes  called  a  “weak-form  judicial  review”  of legislative  action  compared  to  the  strong  form  that  exists  in  the  other  countries such as the United States.¹⁴ 16 The constitutional issues with the Bill of Rights revolve around the powers of the Courts  compared  to  the  powers  of  the  Executive  branch  and  Parliament.  There was a lively debate in New Zealand in 2004 concerning the appropriate sphere of judicial versus parliamentary decision-making. That debate raises the issue of who has the final word - is it Parliament or the Courts?  Is the system characterized by parliamentary or judicial supremacy? Or is this question misconceived? Is there a constitutional mutation taking place and if there is, in what direction is it taking us? 15 17 Like many issues in constitutional law and constitutional debate it comes down to a  normative  judgment  about  the  appropriate  distribution  of  powers  among  the branches  of  government.  After  fifteen  years  we  are  now  in  a  position  to  make some judgments about what the effect of the Bill of Rights may have been had the courts  back  then  been  given  the  power  to  strike  down  laws  that  offended  its provisions.   18 There are some examples of legislation passed that is in breach of the provisions of  the  Bill  of  Rights.  The  most  obvious  example  was  the  legislation  that retrospectively increased the penalty for home invasion.¹⁶ These measures came before  the  courts  in  two  cases.¹⁷  In  one  of  the  cases  the  Court  of  Appeal condemned the amendment as being inconsistent with the rule of law but was able to avoid the big question of inconsistency with the Bill of Rights because the                                                   14   Mark Tushnet, “Weak-Form Judicial Review:  Its Implications for Legislatures” (2004) 2 NZJPIL7, 7.    15   Rt  Hon  Dame  Sian  Elias  GNZM  “Sovereignty  in  the  21^st  Century:  Another  spin  on  the merry-go-round” (2003) PLR 148 and Michael Cullen “Parliamentary Sovereignty and the Courts” [2004] NZLJ 243. 16      Criminal Justice Amendment Act 1999; Crimes (Home Invasion) Amendment Act 1999. 17      R v Poumako [2000] 2 NZLR 695; R v Pora [2001] 2 NZLR 37 7