Labour leader Chris Hipkins has reaffirmed his view that Māori did not cede sovereignty when signing the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 and any attempt to claim otherwise is rewriting history.
Speaking to LawNews after a recent breakfast in Auckland hosted by The Law Association, Hipkins said the Crown had assumed sovereignty since 1840 but it was not gained via the treaty.
Unlock this article and all PREMIUM content by subscribing to LawNews
Already a subscriber?
Yeah right, that is the currently fashionable view despite the clear context and wording of the treaty explicitly ceding sovereignty, which is why some chiefs so strongly opposed signing the treaty – they knew exactly what it meant. Instead Chris wants votes and the support of minor parties, and is happy to peddle this nonsense… its been going 50 years with no end in sight.
A treaty must be interpreted in the language and worldview of those who signed it. Since the majority of signatures were on the Māori text, Māori understandings must take precedence.
International law principles (e.g. contra proferentem) dictate that in cases of ambiguity, interpretation favours the non-drafting party – in this case, Māori.
Sovereignty, in te ao Māori, was indivisible and could not be ceded. At most, Māori consented to a shared jurisdiction where the Crown could exercise authority over its settlers while Māori retained authority over their own.
In 1860, there was a conference in Kohimarama that over 200 Maori attended (approx 100 Rangatira). It is clear from the records of that conference that those who attended believed that sovereignty had been ceded.