Maori Principles

Question 1

What are the four reports released by the Waitangi Tribunal that outlines the Crowns relationships and obligations with the Crown?

Answer 1

Manukau Claims
Muriwhenua Report
Te Ike Whenua Rivers Report
Ko Aoteroa Tenei

Question 2

What does the Manukau Claims report say with regards to the nature of Crown-Iwi relations?

Answer 2

The Manukau Claims report clarified the initial translation confusion and broad principles that should govern the relationship going forward.

Sovereignty was not ceded but governorship, Kawangatanga. Tino Rangatiratanga was guaranteed. Treasures affirmed. Partial sea claim but no possession.

Broad principles such as protection, cultural respect, treasures to be broad and continuing interests

Question 3

What does the Muriwhenua Report lay out with regards to Crown-Iwi Relations?

Answer 3

Established how Crown should approach Maori through the Right Interpretive Approach, which favours Maori understandings and dismisses technical legalism

Establish Treaty Principles that will manifest the legal force of the treaty if incorporated in statute.

Question 4

What are the four Treaty Principles laid out in Muriwhenua?

Answer 4

Active Protection
Honorable Conduct
Fair Process
Recognition

Question 5

How are the principles applied via the Te Ike Whenua Report?

Answer 5

The court applies the principles of active protection, partnership and reciprocity to three areas: Rivers, Fisheries and Development.

Court finds the rivers to be whole entities not divisible ones as under English understanding

Court finds Fisheries to be firmly Taonga but diminished due to Crown neglect

Court affirms Maori’ right to develop resources, river development require consent

These three areas demonstrate how principles of preference are played out and instances of treaty principle violations

Question 6

How did the Ko Aotearoa Tenei Report affirm Taonga?

Answer 6

The report looked into the future of Crown-Iwi relationships past the settlement of grievances.

The report had to decided what nature this relationship would be and found that Maturanga Maori should be the context.

The Crown would govern through Kawangatanga but Maori should be afforded full control, Tino Rangatiratanga, over their Taonga and if not, a shared venture

Question 7

Background facts of the Land Cases

Answer 7

Government passes the SOE Act which transforms some government departments (and their public functions) into commercial companies.

Question 8

What Iwi concerns in the Land Cases?

Answer 8

Iwi are concerned that the transferal of Crown land to facilitate these new business would frustrate tribunal claims, now and in the future.

They lodge that the Crowns remedies for these fears, the buying back of land coupled with he companies abilities to pass land onto private owners, are unfeasible

Contrary to treaty principles

Question 9

What does the Crown do to address Iwi concerns in the Land cases?

Answer 9

The Crown amends the SOE Act with section 9 and 27

Section 9 is written broad terms, which prevents the Crown from acting against treaty principles

Section 27 is specific, cutting off new claims when the business are set up

Judicial review sought

Question 10

What is the Crowns argument that it does enough with regards to amendments?

Answer 10

The Crown argues that section 27 is self-contained, that section 9 is subject to 27

Question 11

What is the Courts ruling in the Land Cases?

Answer 11

Courts intervened as there was very little political accountability over the SOE undermining the Crowns argument, and that treaty principles were directly contained.

Court ruled that section 9 should prevail as it implies constitutional principles and rights, the use of section 27 to circumvent this would be constitutionally unfounded and make section 9 void which cannot be parliaments intention, that to window dress.

It does this, contrary to statutory methods, by emphasising the SOE as a constitutional instrument

Question 12

What is the role of treaty principles in the Land Cases and what is the remedy?

Answer 12

Crowns insistence on cut off date flies in the face of partnership and honourable conduct.

Crown must work with Maori to identify claims thoroughly instead of cutting them off arbitrarily

Question 13

What are the facts of the Broadcasting case?

Answer 13

Applicants claim that the SOE transfer of broadcasting doesn’t afford enough protection of Te Reo as a Taonga under section 9.

Question 14

What is the Crowns argument in the Broadcasting case?

Answer 14

The Crown argues that attached to the transfer of broadcasting rights are significant indirect oversight measure to provide accountability.

That this level of accountability will ensure a faithful adherence to section 9 to protect Te Reo over the airwaves

They also argue that they cannot over prioritise Te Reo given broadcasting affects all groups

Question 15

What is the courts ruling in the Broadcasting case?

Answer 15

The court rules that no breach of section 9 of the SOE has occurred. They agree that principles have been adhered to via oversight.

They reject the Crowns argument that they cannot intervene unless met by Wednesbury unreasonableness,

Question 16

How does the RMA reflect changing Crown tact on adhering to treaty principles?

Answer 16

The crown adheres to the RMA via section 5-8 which is paramount to all of section 9 in the SOE Act.

The Crown, seeking to avoid further legal battles, waters down the languages in these provisions to such a point they are no longer mandatory obligations but relevant ones. They are weaker in descending order.

Question 17

What are the facts of the Ngai Tahu Maori Trustboard?

Answer 17

Ngai Tahu operates a whale watching company which is permitted by the Ministry of Conservation.

Another whale watching company is set up nearby operated by non-Iwi also permitted by the MOC.

Ngai Tahu challenges the permit arguing that Treaty grants them exclusive use for some time or requires their consent as Taonga

Question 18

What is the courts ruling in the Ngai Tahu Maori Trustboard?

Answer 18

High court concurs with Ngai Tahu but appealed to COA

Marine Mammal Protection Act subject to the treaty therefore Ngai Tahu is allowed to develop the resource but it does not go far enough to grant them exclusivity over an area not mandated by the original treaty.

Crown should have done more then consult to protect Iwi Interests

Question 19

Facts of the Water Rights case?

Answer 19

Ongoing claims regarding the Waikato river were upended when the Government amended the SOE act to allow them to partially sell land to create a new business entity.

Amendment act, part 5A, has no mention of treaty principles. Iwi mount public pressure

Question 20

What was the Crowns response in the Water Rights cases?

Answer 20

The Crown responded with section 45Q, a new section 9.

Iwi sue through the new section 45Q

Question 21

How did the courts justify their intervention in the Water Rights Case?

Answer 21

Court justified review on the basis that section 45Q amounted to a new section 9, or it successor.

Section 9 was reviewable on the basis it was a constitutional document concerning treaty principles, on that basis section 45Q functions in the same vein.