Post by Kiwi Frontline on Feb 11, 2024 4:50:45 GMT 12
Barry Brill: NZ SOVEREIGNTY - THE LAW IS SETTLED.
The same academics are fond of the judgments of the Court of Appeal in the 1987 ‘Lands Case’ [NZ Maori Council v Attorney-General [1987] 1 NZLR 641] in which it is suggested that the treaty relationship was “akin to a partnership” in certain narrow respects. This is what the Lands Case had to say about the claim to sovereignty [Somers J at p 15 of his judgment]:
“We were referred to a number of valuable commentaries on this part of the Treaty and to the several determinations of the Waitangi Tribunal . They provide grounds for thinking that there were important differences between the understanding of the signatories as to the true intent and meaning of Article 1 of the Treaty. But notwithstanding that feature, I am of opinion that the question of sovereignty in New Zealand is not in doubt. On 21 May 1840, Governor Hobson proclaimed “the full sovereignty of the Queen over the whole of the North Island” by virtue of the rights and powers ceded to the Crown by the Treaty of Waitangi and over the South Island Stewart Island on grounds of discovery. These proclamations were approved in London and published in the London Gazette of 2 October 1840. The sovereignty of the Crown was then beyond dispute and the subsequent legislative history of New Zealand clearly evidences that. Sovereignty in New Zealand resides in Parliament”. [Emphasis added]
So, that should have been the end of the matter. The NZ Maori Council had their day in Court 36 years ago and they lost on this issue – outright. The 1987 decision has not been and could not be challenged in any Court of competent jurisdiction. The subsequent views of the Waitangi Tribunal, and its inability to take no for an answer, are both irrelevant and disrespectful.
Professor Vowles says the issue of Maori sovereignty is central to the debate over the Government’s pending Treaty Principles Bill. If he is right, then the argument is over before it has begun. The law is settled and the constitutional position is clear – New Zealand sovereignty is vested in the New Zealand House of Representatives and nowhere else…..
breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/02/barry-brill-nz-sovereignty-law-is.html
The same academics are fond of the judgments of the Court of Appeal in the 1987 ‘Lands Case’ [NZ Maori Council v Attorney-General [1987] 1 NZLR 641] in which it is suggested that the treaty relationship was “akin to a partnership” in certain narrow respects. This is what the Lands Case had to say about the claim to sovereignty [Somers J at p 15 of his judgment]:
“We were referred to a number of valuable commentaries on this part of the Treaty and to the several determinations of the Waitangi Tribunal . They provide grounds for thinking that there were important differences between the understanding of the signatories as to the true intent and meaning of Article 1 of the Treaty. But notwithstanding that feature, I am of opinion that the question of sovereignty in New Zealand is not in doubt. On 21 May 1840, Governor Hobson proclaimed “the full sovereignty of the Queen over the whole of the North Island” by virtue of the rights and powers ceded to the Crown by the Treaty of Waitangi and over the South Island Stewart Island on grounds of discovery. These proclamations were approved in London and published in the London Gazette of 2 October 1840. The sovereignty of the Crown was then beyond dispute and the subsequent legislative history of New Zealand clearly evidences that. Sovereignty in New Zealand resides in Parliament”. [Emphasis added]
So, that should have been the end of the matter. The NZ Maori Council had their day in Court 36 years ago and they lost on this issue – outright. The 1987 decision has not been and could not be challenged in any Court of competent jurisdiction. The subsequent views of the Waitangi Tribunal, and its inability to take no for an answer, are both irrelevant and disrespectful.
Professor Vowles says the issue of Maori sovereignty is central to the debate over the Government’s pending Treaty Principles Bill. If he is right, then the argument is over before it has begun. The law is settled and the constitutional position is clear – New Zealand sovereignty is vested in the New Zealand House of Representatives and nowhere else…..
breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2024/02/barry-brill-nz-sovereignty-law-is.html