Tikanga Isn’t A Legal System — And Never Was
Tikanga is a set of cultural customs, values, and spiritual concepts. But it is not a coherent system of enforceable law. Before 1840, different iwi followed different practices; there were no nationwide rules, courts, judgments, or precedents. Conflict resolution depended on status and kinship, not legal principle.
Trying to retrofit tikanga into the common law doesn’t honour heritage — it injects uncertainty. Tikanga varies from place to place. A lawyer cannot apply “the tikanga position” when dozens of iwi hold different interpretations. Courts cannot enforce spiritual concepts without choosing favourites.
A legal system cannot function on “consult the right kaumātua.”
If It’s So Essential, Why Force It?
We’re told students love it. If so, why the compulsion? Compulsion signals weakness, not strength. Valuable subjects thrive voluntarily. Ideological ones get mandated.
Tikanga is compulsory because its champions want to reshape the profession, not because the practice of law requires it.
Courts Have Not Declared Tikanga A New Branch Of Law
Supporters claim the Supreme Court has embraced tikanga as part of the common law. Not true. Courts reference tikanga when legislation requires it, or when it provides cultural context. That’s not the same as turning tikanga into binding legal doctrine.
Judges citing tikanga doesn’t make it law — any more than quoting Shakespeare makes Hamlet a statute.
Tikanga cannot be transformed into universal legal rules without stripping it of its meaning.
Legal Practice Needs Clarity — Not Spiritual Ambiguity
Law depends on predictable rules, consistent standards, and equal treatment. Tikanga depends on iwi, context, relationships, and spiritual concepts like wairua and mauri — none of which are capable of uniform national enforcement.
Teaching tikanga as culture is fine. Teaching it as law is not.
The Real Risk: Weakening The Profession
New Zealand needs lawyers who understand contracts, evidence, torts, property, and statutory interpretation. Diluting core legal education with compulsory cultural doctrine produces graduates fluent in vocabulary but shaky in principle.
A lawyer who can perform karakia but cannot draft a trust deed is not serving Māori or anyone else.
Respect Requires Honesty
Tikanga deserves respect and voluntary study. But compulsory ideological instruction undermines both legal clarity and cultural integrity. It doesn’t create a justice system that reflects everyone.
It creates a justice system where universal law gives way to cultural preference — and where the rule of law is weakened in the name of political symbolism.
Compulsory tikanga isn’t progress. It’s the slow replacement of legal certainty with ideological orthodoxy — and New Zealand deserves better.
The propaganda that this article is referring to here > https://waateanews.com/2025/12/10/metiria-turei-tikanga-maori-law-senior-lecturer/
Source: Facebook
Tikanga is a set of cultural customs, values, and spiritual concepts. But it is not a coherent system of enforceable law. Before 1840, different iwi followed different practices; there were no nationwide rules, courts, judgments, or precedents. Conflict resolution depended on status and kinship, not legal principle.
Trying to retrofit tikanga into the common law doesn’t honour heritage — it injects uncertainty. Tikanga varies from place to place. A lawyer cannot apply “the tikanga position” when dozens of iwi hold different interpretations. Courts cannot enforce spiritual concepts without choosing favourites.
A legal system cannot function on “consult the right kaumātua.”
If It’s So Essential, Why Force It?
We’re told students love it. If so, why the compulsion? Compulsion signals weakness, not strength. Valuable subjects thrive voluntarily. Ideological ones get mandated.
Tikanga is compulsory because its champions want to reshape the profession, not because the practice of law requires it.
Courts Have Not Declared Tikanga A New Branch Of Law
Supporters claim the Supreme Court has embraced tikanga as part of the common law. Not true. Courts reference tikanga when legislation requires it, or when it provides cultural context. That’s not the same as turning tikanga into binding legal doctrine.
Judges citing tikanga doesn’t make it law — any more than quoting Shakespeare makes Hamlet a statute.
Tikanga cannot be transformed into universal legal rules without stripping it of its meaning.
Legal Practice Needs Clarity — Not Spiritual Ambiguity
Law depends on predictable rules, consistent standards, and equal treatment. Tikanga depends on iwi, context, relationships, and spiritual concepts like wairua and mauri — none of which are capable of uniform national enforcement.
Teaching tikanga as culture is fine. Teaching it as law is not.
The Real Risk: Weakening The Profession
New Zealand needs lawyers who understand contracts, evidence, torts, property, and statutory interpretation. Diluting core legal education with compulsory cultural doctrine produces graduates fluent in vocabulary but shaky in principle.
A lawyer who can perform karakia but cannot draft a trust deed is not serving Māori or anyone else.
Respect Requires Honesty
Tikanga deserves respect and voluntary study. But compulsory ideological instruction undermines both legal clarity and cultural integrity. It doesn’t create a justice system that reflects everyone.
It creates a justice system where universal law gives way to cultural preference — and where the rule of law is weakened in the name of political symbolism.
Compulsory tikanga isn’t progress. It’s the slow replacement of legal certainty with ideological orthodoxy — and New Zealand deserves better.
The propaganda that this article is referring to here > https://waateanews.com/2025/12/10/metiria-turei-tikanga-maori-law-senior-lecturer/
Source: Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.