Rāhui. It's becoming an important word. It's also been in
the news a lot lately. To place a rāhui on something is to restrict or prohibit
access, normally temporary to allow replenishment.
This is quite different from a Wahi Tapu, which is a reserve
empowered by the Historic Places Act 1993 and is defined as a place sacred to
Maori in the traditional, spiritual, religious, ritual or mythological sense.
These tend to be site specific but may be an area.
A rāhui has been placed over the Waitakere Ranges by the
mana whenua in a bid to stop the spread of kauri dieback disease. Auckland City
councillors have voted to support the rāhui in principle. Councillor Penny
Hulse described the rāhui as an emotional experience. Mana whenua described
themselves as "the guardians of the forest and so they have an obligation
to preserve the environment for all Aucklanders". They are seeking to
enforce the rāhui via the Biosecurity Act which gives power to the Minister of
Biosecurity.
A rāhui is in place in an area of Maunganui Bay/Deep Water
Cove near Rawhiti in the Bay of Islands, and this has been adopted by the
Minister of Fisheries under Section 186A of the Fisheries Act. The effect has
been to close the area to all fishing, except for gathering kina. Fines of up
to $100,000 apply to anybody caught breaching the rahui/fishing ban. The rāhui
is reviewed by the Ministry of Primary Industries every two years.
And a rāhui was recently placed on a refurbished classroom
at the Kaikohe Intermediate School because an elder of a local hapu said the
name of the building was "entirely inappropriate" and entry into the
building was forbidden. All ended well: the building was given a new more
acceptable name. It was later acknowledged that the rāhui was not about
replenishment but had been used to make a point, presumably about the need to
consult with hapu when a refurbished building is given a Maori name.
The essential issue here is that a rāhui in itself has no
legislative powers. It needs to be backed up by an Act of Parliament to confer
the power of enforcement. Normally the relevant Minister has the discretion to
give effect to the intention of the rāhui - to restrict access - via an Order
in Council.
So its importance is largely one of influence - being able
to influence a Minister (or local council if the land is owned by a local
authority).
The use of rāhui becomes more of an issue in the context of
the 580 claims by iwi/hapu regarding the
ownership of the marine and coastal area. Of these, 380 claims have been
referred to the Minister of Treaty Negotiations who will decide whether
customary rights exist. The Minister is likely to ask for public submissions on
each of the claims that are accepted for consideration, although the Minister
alone will decide and there is no appeal process. The other 200 claims have
been referred to the High Court. In those cases, those who file a Notice of Appearance as an
interested party (and pay $110 per claim) can
be involved in the court process and have the right of appeal.
The claims cover the entire New Zealand coastline and the
seabed extending out 12 nautical miles out from the coast to the edge of the
Territorial Sea. In most cases there are multiple competing claims for the same
area. I will provide greater detail about each of the claims in the Whangarei
District in a future article. The list of claims has been requested from local
councils.
The issue is an important one to residents, particularly in
Northland, where multiple claims have
been lodged for the harbours, coastline and seabed. Should title for those
areas pass to Maori interests (and in many cases that decision will be made by
the Minister of Treaty Negotiations alone) then private property rights would
be conferred to the iwi/hapu concerned.
Many of the claims make reference
to rāhui – claimants want the right to impose rāhui at their discretion.
Rāhui is a word we could be hearing a lot more of in the
future.
Those groups or individuals who have an interest in how our
harbours, beaches and the seabed are used in the future do need to get up to
speed on this issue, quickly. The final close off date for lodging a Notice of
Appearance - to have a say in the High Court claims - closes on February 26th,
so there is no time to lose.
Frank Newman
writes a weekly article for Property Plus.
4 comments:
Does this ban by the maori mafia on humans entering the bush also include birds, deer, possums, rats, and the wind? Maori pretending to be conservationists after what they did to the Moa, Huia and Moriori is a joke.
I find this comment very disrespectful to Maori it breaches your own standards if people don't back there comments with their names they shouldn't be able to have their comments published ignorance causes distain
In response to Te Arahi Kapeea. While I too generally believe people should put their name to comments, there are situations where it is appropriate not to do so. One such situation is where the response is typically threatening, as is the reaction to those who challenge the influence of Maori custom. I fully endorse the use of anonymous posts in such cases. All too often ordinary folk with a valuable contribution to make are scared into silence.
Disrespectful to Maori ? How about it going both ways ? The disrespect Maori have shown to Kiwis since 1975 is atrocious . We, and New Zealand, have been sucked bone dry and you demand respect ? When all the maori who are able to work, get off the 'bennie', and start paying taxes like the rest of us, stop claiming everything is YOURS, and start showing respect for others by being Kiwis like the 89% of Kiwis, you will continue getting contempt. @Te Arahi Kapeea
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.