The choice cannot be based on Human Rights, since even now the maori activists that desire this change state definitely that democracy is a concept that cannot be recognised or adhered to by maori custom or ritenga.
The Westminster system is an anathema to the maori way (I have been personally involved twice in actual maori Court cases). If a rangatira or tangata nui (important person) gives oral evidence, it cannot be questioned or cross-examined, since that would be disrespectful, so they can say the most outrageous things and get away with it.
Discovery is a farce – you must present your case to them in advance or it is not admissible, but they can present the majority of theirs in the actual Court so that you have no chance of preparing for it. That is accepted.
Bear in mind that if a maori (ordinary person) disagreed with a Rangatira in the past under their system he could be invited to dinner – where he was the main course. There were few options in between – their “Law” was one of extremes.
Since we also have tribal differences, there would be no way of incorporating their interpretation of law in a well-defined package within the Westminster system we have legally adopted by a democratically elected Parliament – elected by the maori as well as the “other 84%” (There are 33 MPs out of 123 of maori descent at present in the NZ Parliament, so they are well represented).
Obviously the whole concept of incorporating tikanga into our Courts must be rejected. All citizens of New Zealand and those present in this country for whatever reason must be subject to one set of laws regardless of Race, Colour or Creed. There can be no exceptions. This is a democracy and that is a founding principle of democracy – equality in all things.
The Courts are usurping the right of creating/changing Law from the Parliament, so the only practical option is positive new legislation that defines the powers of the Courts and removes the application of Tikanga where that does not meet the defined principles of true democracy and existing Legislation.
Ross Muir studied science at Victoria and Canterbury Universities. This article was first published HERE
Discovery is a farce – you must present your case to them in advance or it is not admissible, but they can present the majority of theirs in the actual Court so that you have no chance of preparing for it. That is accepted.
Bear in mind that if a maori (ordinary person) disagreed with a Rangatira in the past under their system he could be invited to dinner – where he was the main course. There were few options in between – their “Law” was one of extremes.
Since we also have tribal differences, there would be no way of incorporating their interpretation of law in a well-defined package within the Westminster system we have legally adopted by a democratically elected Parliament – elected by the maori as well as the “other 84%” (There are 33 MPs out of 123 of maori descent at present in the NZ Parliament, so they are well represented).
Obviously the whole concept of incorporating tikanga into our Courts must be rejected. All citizens of New Zealand and those present in this country for whatever reason must be subject to one set of laws regardless of Race, Colour or Creed. There can be no exceptions. This is a democracy and that is a founding principle of democracy – equality in all things.
The Courts are usurping the right of creating/changing Law from the Parliament, so the only practical option is positive new legislation that defines the powers of the Courts and removes the application of Tikanga where that does not meet the defined principles of true democracy and existing Legislation.
Ross Muir studied science at Victoria and Canterbury Universities. This article was first published HERE
3 comments:
It is unbelievable that tikanga was ever contemplated. I can only assume that in generating enormous paid for in court debate, it is in keeping with the make work principle which drives the legal profession. The more vague the law the bigger the money go round. Tikanga is not defined and not established by decades and centuries of case law. It is to be based on the opinion of a few (very well paid) "experts". If maori wish to apply such nonsense between themselves maybe OK. But leave others out. It was tikanga to compound person's natural misfortunes. If a "wife" ran off his own tribe robbed the "husband" of any and all worldlies. (At least current law limits the losses to half). (Shipwrecked Europeans had difficulty with this law! Anyone involved in a car crash can expect to be stripped)
(Incredibly the Waitangi Tribunal accepts all testimony by mature maori as being from "expert witness"!)
Anon10.19 I think you meant old not mature. Unless of course mature is a polite reference to rotten.
NZ is sadly becoming more and more of a farce. The legal system- including personnel- are ridiculous. All the way to the top.
Me too. What a bunch of nut-jobs!
Post a Comment