Is that even legal reasoning? It reads like babbling or a shitpost. That's nonsensical.
Wow, that's not even just some random judge's opinion. The other judge is quoting it.
How is the right to a speedy trial enforced if there are absolutely no consequences for not providing one? The reason it is enforced in the U.S. is that if you do not prosecute someone in a speedy manner, you don't get to do it. The judge doesn't notice you waited 10 years and say "lol whatever."
New Zealand judges suck and are a bunch of idiots.