The situation with the pro-euthanasia meeting that was targeted by police.

The police say they did set up a drink-drive checkpoint in Lower Hutt, in a bid to identify people who were at that 'exit international' meeting.

A complaint is before the Police Conduct Authority -- the accusation is that police set up the checkpoint under false pretenses.

Did they, or was this just part of a wider investigation?

I think it’s interesting when you delve into this.

Is it odd? Yes. It doesn’t feel right does it? But this was part of an investigation into a suspected self-inflicted death. The coroner had been asked to put the investigation on hold, because police were considering whether the death had, in fact, become a criminal investigation.

In other words, they were investigating whether someone had assisted a person to die, and regardless of where you sit on the euthanasia debate, that is illegal.

You cannot assist someone to die in this country and police have a duty of care. Their role is to uphold the law, and they say this was part of a potential criminal investigation.

The issue is, was the checkpoint legitimate? Well, that's a difficult question. People were breathalysed as they left the meeting so in that sense it was, but police used the checkpoint as an opportunity to gather people's names and addresses.

They were leaving an Exit International meeting. The founder of Exit International is Philip Nitschke. He was the first doctor in the world to administer a legal, lethal voluntary injection in Australia before the rights of the Terminally Ill Act was overturned in the 90s. It was a short-lived act, but he did assist people to die.

And it's not illegal for people to meet to discuss euthanasia in this country, or for Exit International to hold a meeting here, but police say if they believe they have reasonable grounds to suspect that people are being assisted in the commission of suicide, then they have a duty of care to investigate the situation.

They say the gathering of the information at the checkpoint allowed police to provide support and information to people who they believed were contemplating suicide.

So how does that sit with you?

David Seymour, the Act leader, says it was a "Deeply un-kiwi" thing for police to do. He says it is -- quote -- "Dodgy". He says people have the right to discuss issues without the fear of police harassment.

Was it police harassment? Or was it police upholding the law?