Monday, May 27, 2019

KA MAUMAHARA MATOU - WE REMEMBER



This past week has included the anniversaries of two very important events in our history; the beginning of the pacifist ploughmen protest at Parihaka on 26th May 1879, and the eviction of 222 Māori from Takapauwhara (Bastion Point) on 25th May 1978.

The ploughmen protect was one of the most courageous and creative forms of political protest ever conceived and enacted in this country when Māori men from the community of Parihaka began to plough up the land of Pākehā settlers.

This action, taken under the leadership of the Parihaka prophets Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi, was the community’s response to the government’s repeated failure to deal honourably with Taranaki Māori over land.

The ploughmen knew what they were letting themselves in for. They would face Pākehā wrath. They would face almost certain arrest and incarceration. But they rallied to the words of Te Whiti: “Go put your hands to the plough. Look not back. If any come with guns and swords, be not afraid. If they smite you, smite not in return. If they rend you, be not discouraged. Another will take up the good work.”

In short order, more than 400 Parihaka ploughmen were deported and imprisoned for up to two years — sometimes as far away as Hokitika and Dunedin. Not one was ever tried in a court of law. The government found it convenient to suspend the right to a trial and passed a series of draconian laws under the guise of “national emergency” that became progressively more desperate and unjust as time went by.

There were also atrocities. When arrested, some ploughmen were tied to a horse and dragged around a paddock. That brutality is remembered in the name Totoia, which means dragging, given to some Parihaka children to preserve the memory of those times. Another name bestowed on children was Ngarukeruke, the discarded body.

When some of the ploughmen asked Tohu Kākahi what should be done if they were met with violence, Tohu answered: “Gather up the earth on which the blood is spilt and bring it to Parihaka.”

The same pacifist approach was enacted in 1978 by Ngāti Whātua protesting the Crown sale of Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei land.  

The famous catch-cry of 'not one more acre' from Dame Whina Cooper that came to voice in the 1970s, had brought the fight of Māori to regain their stolen lands surging into the mainstream spotlight, and the most defining image of that fight was the 506 day occupation of Takapauwhara (Bastion Point).

On Day 506, on the orders of then Prime Minister Robert Muldoon, more than 800 police officers marched up to Bastion Point on that day to forcibly remove protestors and destroy their buildings.

The protest and eviction became one of the defining moments in the battle for Māori land rights and led to the extension of the Waitangi Tribunal’s ability to inquire into claims against the Crown for breaches of Te Tiriti dating back to 1840; originally it had only been able to consider claims from 1975 onwards.

We remember.

Monday, May 13, 2019

WORKING TOGETHER

How does the work done by the Pou Tikanga of the National Iwi Chairs Forum (NICF) connect with the issues facing our people every day?

How would Constitutional Transformation address crime?  Can the Te Tiriti Partnership Framework protect our environment?  Will a National Plan of Implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) improve our health and economy?

To help answer these questions, I take a case study approach to how just one of these issues (crime) was dealt with in the past, is dealt with today, and could be dealt with in the future. 

In the past all hara (crime) was defined as the violation of tapū and dealt with by the application of mana and tikanga; tikanga being both the law and a discrete set of values by which mana was given constitutional structure and expression in daily life by ordinary people.  

The main purpose of tikanga was to hold together the whare tangata (the ‘house of the people’), and for centuries it fulfilled that purpose.  Today, it doesn’t do that so much.

Today, crime is now defined as “an action or omission which constitutes an offence” against laws that are historically and heavily based on English law and are constitutionally expressed by the Executive who write them, the Parliament who pass them, and the Judiciary who apply them.  Ordinary people have little to do with law except in its enforcement or their breach of it.

The main purpose of English law is to “protect various liberties and rights from violations or unreasonable intrusions by persons, organizations, or government.”  For tangata whenua, it has rarely, if ever, fulfilled that purpose.

And yet, through the work already done to progress Constitutional Transformation, establish the Tiriti Partnership Framework and implement the UNDRIP, an accommodation can be seen slowly emerging between these two legal systems.  An example of that accommodation can be read in Max Harris’ 2013 review of a 2012 High Court decision by  Justice Heath (R v Mason [2012] NZHC 1361).

Another example of the emerging accommodation is the recent appointment of Justice Joe Williams as the first Māori to the Supreme Court.  Annette Sykes called it, “the kind of development that will ensure the recognition of the underpinnings of the first law of this nation, tikanga Māori, and how the intersect of that law, the introduced colonisers’ law, is important in future decisions that advance justice between and amongst the communities that co-exist in Aotearoa."

But, for me, the neatest example is a lot closer to home.  I’m talking about Te Whānau Moana Te Rorohuri on Karikari Peninsula who are successfully partnering with government departments to work on a range of issues in their rohe, from environmental protection to stamping out P (methamphetamine). 

Constitutional recognition and protection of the emerging accommodation between ordinary people practicing tikanga and working together with government practicing law; that is the connection of the work of Pou Tikanga with the issues facing our people every day.

Thursday, May 02, 2019

THE INFORMATION AGE



We live in the Information Age and, like it or lump it, information technology has now become the driving force of our daily social life and our ongoing social evolution with both good and bad applications.  Nowhere is this more evident than on social media.

Last week there was an armed offenders’ operation in Kaitāia that had the potential to be dangerous to everyone in the neighbourhood.  During it, I was able to access and share on social media accurate information that people needed to know in order to be and stay safe throughout.

Kaitāia Crime Watch (KCW) is a facebook platform set up in 2014 to help the public and the police address crime in our town.  Local police have administration rights on it so they can remove posts or turn off comments at any time.  Knowing this, I contacted local police and then posted the following messages to the KCW page during the operation:

7.31pm:  I live on Matthews Ave where there is a major police operation underway.  Best advice is to stay indoors until the operation is over.

8.15pm:  The incident is not yet over.  Please stay indoors and let police do their mahi.  I will advise when the roads are reopened.

9.23pm:  The incident is now over, and the roads are reopened.

However, by the time I made that final post, I knew things could and should have been handled better by the police in every aspect, some of which I will address separately.  Today, I address their communication strategy, or lack thereof.

In this Information Age, people turn to social media.  Police know this and run their own facebook page.  But at no point during the operation did they use it to communicate with us.  And before anyone objects that they don’t have time during an operation – poppycock!  

The same facts communicated to and then by me to KCW could just as easily and more authoritatively have been communicated directly to the public by the police.

KCW members have always supported good policing in our town.  So, it was both galling and ironic to see, within 24 hours of the operation ending, KCW cop flak from police via the local media for ‘scaremongering’ about the operation because of some misinformed comments on my post. 

Yes, some commenters got things wrong.  But, given that public safety was at stake and public fear was already high, it was important that someone post factual information so that people could then sift through any dross and drama to work out what they needed to know to be and stay safe.

As we all reflect on how and what we communicate on social media, police and media need to do the same.  Because if they aren’t willing and able to quickly communicate important safety messages to the public, then they ought not be surprised or upset when the silence is filled by social media. 

In this Information Age, more than ever, good policing requires communication.