Last week the Supreme Court delivered the second of its two-part judgement on the first Marine and Coastal Area Act case to progress its way through to our highest court.
In their initial judgement, which was released last December, instead of interpreting the law as Parliament intended so only a minority of claims for the coast would succeed, the Supreme Court took an activist approach by declaring that “tikanga” or Maori custom should be at the heart of all coastal claim decision-making. In doing so they virtually guaranteed tribal control of New Zealand’s coastline.
The second ruling, which also favours Maori, opens up the country’s waterways for tribal claim. While the decision only affects the beds of navigable rivers that form part of the coastal marine area – namely whichever is the lesser of one kilometre upstream or five times the river’s width at the mouth - it would nevertheless give Maori sovereignty activists a foot in the door.
