Post by Kiwi Frontline on Nov 7, 2018 5:20:29 GMT 12
Otago Daily Times 7/11/18
NGAI TAHU CLAIMS
Lisa Tumahai. of Ngai Tahu, claims (ODT, 1.11.18) that "the principle of partnership ... is clearly outlined in the Treaty of Waitangi ... it is a key principle espoused by the Treaty".
In 1991, Government constitutional lawyer Paul McHugh said "no-one pretends that the language of `partnership' and 'fiduciary obligation' was exchanged on the seaside promontory at Waitangi in 1840. The Courts have stressed their construction of what amounts to a contemporary mythology of the Treaty."
If one looks at the relevant Court of Appeal cases concerning "partnership", there is no clear espousal of such— just ambiguous musings rather than the precision of expression that is expected from the courts.
There are, however, express determinations that there is no equality in the Crown-Maori relationship.
Ms Tumahai should look at the 1989 Tainui and Crown Forests cases to see that claims to equal status with the Crown are bunkum.
The myth of "partnership" serves political agendas not law or equity.
Ngai Tahu seeks rights greater than everyone else, in direct contradiction to Article Three which conveyed the same rights and duties of citizenship as everyone else— hardly a strategy for future harmony.
BRUCE MASON Ranfurly
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers
NGAI TAHU CLAIMS
Lisa Tumahai. of Ngai Tahu, claims (ODT, 1.11.18) that "the principle of partnership ... is clearly outlined in the Treaty of Waitangi ... it is a key principle espoused by the Treaty".
In 1991, Government constitutional lawyer Paul McHugh said "no-one pretends that the language of `partnership' and 'fiduciary obligation' was exchanged on the seaside promontory at Waitangi in 1840. The Courts have stressed their construction of what amounts to a contemporary mythology of the Treaty."
If one looks at the relevant Court of Appeal cases concerning "partnership", there is no clear espousal of such— just ambiguous musings rather than the precision of expression that is expected from the courts.
There are, however, express determinations that there is no equality in the Crown-Maori relationship.
Ms Tumahai should look at the 1989 Tainui and Crown Forests cases to see that claims to equal status with the Crown are bunkum.
The myth of "partnership" serves political agendas not law or equity.
Ngai Tahu seeks rights greater than everyone else, in direct contradiction to Article Three which conveyed the same rights and duties of citizenship as everyone else— hardly a strategy for future harmony.
BRUCE MASON Ranfurly
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers