Or as kiwi youth would nominally mumble: 'wicked cher bro'.
Forgive me for the Ad Hominem.
As to your comment, a proper court was convened, and the process was correct. An excessive show of force was used, not for Dotcom particularly, but as a message/deterrent done in good faith to show others interested in going down this same path (of running an encrypted file locker, I guess). This is fully in accordance with all Commonwealth law systems, NZ included. I don't think anyone is making the argument that the NZ police were doing anything more than marching to the orders given to them (and ultimately supervised) by the US. None of the police on the scene were ever charged or reprimanded for any wrongdoing in the Dotcom Case. Why? Because they were just doing their job on a special day. They've all had terrorism training, and they were about to assist in the apprehension of an international terrorist (you know, like Assange, and Neij).
Now, with this in mind, why did a public official resign due to this fully lawful raid? because the people demanded that he did. The people were unhappy, and wanted someone to take responsibility for this massive screw-up. When that happened, someone resigned. This means that NZ's government still listens to (and fears) its people, and that might hold true for the rest of the Commonwealth as well. Could you imagine if the US government actually listened to its people? Could you imagine if the US citizens actually cared?
I take it you're in agreement with everything else I said, as well?
http://techliberty.org.nz/govt-proposes-gcsb-control-over-nz...
eg. Chea bo