The 6th February commemorates the signing of the founding document of New Zealand, Te Tiriti O Waitangi, on the 6th February, 1840. This day, paradoxically, commemorates the purported equal partnership between the indigenous people of New Zealand and their foreign superpower friend and protector, and more importantly, it is a day reaffirming the imperial allegiance of the indigenous people of New Zealand, the New Zealand Maori, with their Imperial partners and guardians (misinterpretation of the word ‘governance’, (or Kawanatanga) for the English definition being the absolute surrendering of the respective Iwi chieftain’s sovereignty rights to an imperial ruler, being that of the British Crown). Moreover, within the three articles of the treaty stipulate the covenant conditions between the Aboriginal people of New Zealand and Her Majesty the Queen of the British Empire, then, in 1840, Her Majesty Queen Victoria.
The paradox, it seems, in modern-day debate, has been the demands by the indigenous people, Te Tangata Whenua, for the government, and the citizens of New Zealand, to having to honour the terms and conditions of the treaty, vis-à-vis, with a specific reference tothe Article Two of the treaty, regarding the pre-emptive selling of indigenous lands and resources, by the government, in the name of the Crown, to private industries and agencies. Moreover, under article two of the Treaty the pre-emptive clause prevents asset sales without prior consultation with the specific land owners of a particular purported or actual Crown owned asset. Controversy over asset sales has ignited much bellicose contention between respective Maori Iwi and government agencies over the years. What seems to be displaced from the pursuit of the soveriegnty rights for the indigenous people has been the adherence to the terms of the Treaty which is in thus reaffirms their loss of soveriegnty rights to a foreign ruler. Therefore, the Treaty of Waitangi enshrines the constitutional monarchy of the British rulership over the indigneous people of New Zealand.
Peter Dunne‘s United Future political party, seemed the only political party within New Zealand with a firm party manifesto inclusion for a republic of New Zealand, although, the two major political parties of New Zealand have acknowledged the seemingly inevitable transition towards a New Zealand republic, in the short-term at least this debate is held on hiatus.
What does seem to be emphasised by the modern political climate of New Zealand society is the commercial value of the Treaty of Waitangi for the respective Iwi Trusts and their respective Iwis, rather than the fundamental concern over the constitutional ramification of the view of honouring the term of Te Tiriti by the advocates for Te Tino Rangitiratanga, which has loss their passion once their firm activists were elected into office has presentday members of parliament. What seems to be accusatory of the Tino Rangitiratanga movement is the affirmation of the Maori alliegence to the Crown and not in the pursuit of self determination through a Republic of New Zealand. This goal displacement seems to make the Treaty of Waitangi anti-self determination and against the interest of an independence of New Zealand from an imperial ruler.
The most prevalent concern is the insipid referral by the indigenous people for an imperial document in order for them to acquire ancient land rights and asset claims. In so doing, facilitating the imperial British courts, such as the Privy Council, in order to attain confiscated land rights and the purported stolen assets and the prevention of asset sales without a royalty or stipend for the loss of assets. The Privy Council was the last court of appeal for the indigenous people in order to have their treaty right honoured. This last resort has been repealed by the creation of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, as being the highest court of the land in 2004. There are no longer any appeals to the Privy Council since inception of the New Zealand Supreme Court Act, in 2004.
The lessons of history seems to be very salient for the indigenous people of New Zealand which is, indeed, to undo the damage of imperial entrapment with James Busby‘s connivance in preying upon the gullibility of semantics of the English language by a non English Speaking indigenous culture, and by convincing the Maori chiefs to sign away their sovereignty rights as scribed under the English version of the Treaty of Waitangi. In truth, the seemingly tardiness of the Maori would be revealed within the old communication adage,’ lost in translation’. Comparaively speaking, the lessons of the American war of independence had taught valuable lessons to the indignant English ruler, in that, a response to good colonial rule was contrived with a particular ingenious diplomatic formula which was emphasised most strikingly perfect with the documentation of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840.
To this day, the irony of history would reveal that the indigenous people of New Zealand would become the most vehement defender of the Crown so long as their demands are honoured, in so doing, in that everyone would honour the Treaty. Why? it is, indeed, the thirty pieces of silver for their sovereignty, as contained within article two of the treaty. The Monarchy League of New Zealand will find no other loyal subjects as the indigenous people of New Zealand.
Conversely, you will find that it is the Pakeha (White or non-Maori New Zealand Citizen) whom have already put into motion the process for a New Zealand Republic inadvertently through such actions as the repeal of the Privy Council and the creation of the New Zealand Supreme Court system. By denying outside interference in Treaty settlement matters, New Zealanders are able to solve their own disputes amongst themselves.