Speaker Trevor Mallard has withdrawn five trespass notices issued after the Parliament occupation following push-back from Winston Peters and MPs across the House.

Peters has confirmed that one of the withdrawn notices was his own, as have National MP Matt King and former Māori Party co-leader Marama Fox.

The five come from a pool of 151 trespass notices, with 144 of those being people who were arrested by police during the protest.

Mallard says seven additional notices were issued to 'persons of interest” with five of these being withdrawn – and two remaining in force.

'I have been working with Police and Parliamentary Security to constantly assess threats to Parliament, and the advice I have received is that it is no longer necessary to retain trespass notices for these five people,” Mallard says in a statement.

'The behaviour of some individuals was clearly more egregious than others, and on that basis it has been relatively easy to identify those persons issued with trespass notices who no longer are regarded as being a risk to the safety and security of others at Parliament.”

Peters attended after Speaker Trevor Mallard closed the grounds to the protests and issued a trespass notice, an action taken after protesters erected tents and blocked off the roads around Parliament.

He did not speak at the protest or participate over several days – as King did.

Peters says in a statement that it should not have taken his threat of judicial review for the Speaker to back down.

'This whole issue from the start to finish has been an absolute shambles, and has caused a number of people unnecessary anguish and expense,” Peters says.

He says he will be be filing an Official Information Act request about the matter. Parliamentary Services is exempt from this law however.

Mallard's backdown came after the original trespass orders were widely criticised.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says Mallard has received feedback from many MPs across the House around 'the question” of whether the response was proportionate – given some people had been trespassed for simply attending the protest, like Peters, while others had engaged in violent behaviour.

Fellow Labour MP Chris Hipkins also raised the issue of proportionality. Attorney General David Parker say it was 'his decision” when asked if he supported Mallard and replied 'no comment” when asked if he had provided any feedback to Mallard.

National leader Christopher Luxon also pushed for some proportionality to be used.

'I personally would just let it go and let the country move on,” Luxon says.

ACT leader David Seymour says anyone who had thrown rocks at police should have 'the book thrown at them” but he doubts whether other trespass orders will stand up in court.

Mallard says the actual decision to trespass Peters and King was not made by him, but by Parliamentary Security, who he had delegated responsibility to.

King has been asked for comment.

University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis says if Peters was elected to Parliament in 2023 the trespass order would likely be voided by a court. Trespass charges against Green MP Sue Bradford were dropped in 1999 when she was elected.

'I think that would have to happen, in that even if you had a Speaker who refused to withdraw a trespass notice, a court would hold it "unreasonable" to allow it to stand and so deprive the voters of their elected representative,” Geddis says.

'The whole power of the Speaker to issue a trespass notice/maintain a trespass notice is coloured by this ‘reasonableness' requirement, as per High Court jurisprudence.”

-Stuff/Henry Cooke.