Your search

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination’s finding that the New Zealand Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 discriminates against Māori reminds us of the relevance of developments in international law on indigenous peoples’ rights. This article pinpoints the content of those developments and their potential impact domestically. Four conclusions are drawn: indigenous peoples’ land rights are binding on New Zealand via international human rights treaties and, to some degree, under customary international law; international human rights jurisprudence increasingly interprets individual human rights to protect indigenous peoples’ rights; international law relating to indigenous peoples may be applied by New Zealand courts; and New Zealand policy currently falls short of international law on indigenous peoples’ rights.

In 2010 Indigenous peoples' rights continued to feature in discussions in a variety of international fora. Indigenous peoples' traditional knowledge (TK) associated with genetic resources (GR) were discussed under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); under the auspices of the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) and within the World Trade Office (WTO). The United Nations (UN) General Assembly's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Indigenous Peoples' Declaration) featured in debate under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); the UN General Assembly's Third Committee; the work of the UN mechanisms with a specific mandate concerning Indigenous peoples; and, in a landmark ruling of the African Commission on Human and People's Rights (African Commission), was adopted by the African Union. International human rights monitoring bodies also advanced their jurisprudence on the rights of Indigenous peoples.

In this paper I argue that Maori should cite and rely on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in their legal and political claims as this process can lead to the internalisation of these norms even when states reject them. The paper draws heavily on the case study of the use of the Declaration in a Waitangi Tribunal claim relating to Maori self-determination.

Standing back, the greatest influence of Indigenous Peoples on international law is our contribution to a pragmatically-driven yet conscious reframing of its foundations. Partly as a result of our participation in international law, it is changing its nineteenth and twentieth century state-centric, colonial, and positivist character to a more informal, flexible, and partially decolonizing system of law. In this way, Indigenous Peoples are crafting a legal system that achieves the “sweet-spot.” It has sufficient “hard-law” quality to restrain the self-interested instincts of powerful states—much needed by Indigenous Peoples seeking to realize their claims against states—and systemic inclusion and justice.

Discusses the New Zealand position on the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is a deeply significant document. In 2007, then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described its signing as an "historic moment when UN Member States and indigenous peoples reconciled with their painful histories and resolved to move forward together on the path of human rights, justice and development for all". This book reflects on the tenth anniversary of the UN General Assembly's adoption of the Declaration and examines its relevance in New Zealand. It shows the strong alignment between the Treaty of Waitangi and the Declaration, and examines how the Declaration assists the interpretation and application of Treaty principles of partnership, protection and participation. Starting from a range of viewpoints and disciplines, the authors agree that in Aotearoa New Zealand the journey to full implementation is now well underway, but warn that greater political leadership, willpower, resources and a stronger government commitment is needed.

This research, entitled te ao pakihi—the business world—set out to identify Māori enterprise perspectives on the New Zealand-United Kingdom free trade agreement (NZ-UK FTA) being negotiated by Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) officials and their UK counterparts. In their desire to uphold the Crown’s obligations to Māori under the Treaty of Waitangi, to invoke some of the goals of the Trade for All agenda, and to meet commitments to Māori in trade policy following tribunal claims and the formation of the Te Taumata, MFAT wanted to be informed about Māori interests so that these could be reflected in the negotiations in real time. MFAT commissioned this independent research into Māori enterprise perspectives in March 2021. The research was conducted between April and June 2021 and involved interviews with 50 Māori enterprises with varying degrees of exporting activity, and entity types and scales, including Māori small and medium enterprise (SMEs), Māori post-settlement governance entities (PSGEs), Māori corporates, and Māori providers, among others. Participants were identified and recruited through networks of the research team. Two forms of analysis and reporting were provided: first, a series of six batch reports each summarising the findings of five interviews, with a total of 30 interviewees—the goal was to provide insights as the information came to hand so negotiators could incorporate Māori perspectives during negotiation rounds—and second, a final report with findings from another 24 interviewees, including three from the sixth batch report. We found that that Māori enterprises see trade as more than an economic opportunity: they see the FTA as embodying a Treaty relationship that has significance because it is one with the original Treaty partner—the British Monarch. This relationship provides much cause for optimism among Māori about the potential for trade; however, it also provides cause for caution among Māori enterprises because of historical trauma, and concerns about the dangers of misappropriating and misuse of Māori cultural and intellectual property, and risks to Treaty and other rights. This can be addressed, according to participants, by ensuring Māori are represented at the (negotiating) table, Māori are involved in the implementation, operation, and evaluation of the NZ-UK FTA, and Māori enterprises are supported to build their capability to trade with the UK in a way that respects their identity as Māori enterprises and in accordance with a Māori way of doing business.

Over the past four decades, international indigenous rights have become a prominent aspect of international law and are now enshrined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Yet, while endorsed by Aotearoa New Zealand in 2010, little remains known about how these standards came about, how the international movement that created them was established, and the implications of these standards on national reforms already protecting Māori rights. International Indigenous Rights in Aotearoa New Zealand seeks to answer these questions. This collection of essays places the Declaration in the context of New Zealand rights around such issues as Treaty settlements, mining policy and the status of Māori children. Crucially, it also asks how Māori can hold New Zealand to account against international indigenous rights.

There are increasing numbers of Māori in New Zealand and Aboriginal peoples in Canada involved in the energy sector. In this paper I explore a number of the factors which have been instrumental in Indigenous peoples becoming involved in energy projects. Utilising a ‘weak theory’ approach I provide narratives of three case studies from New Zealand and Canada (Tuaropaki Trust, Hupacasath First Nation, Peavine Métis Settlement). These cases involve renewable and non-renewable energy types – categories which are often used to judge the value of energy projects. I suggest that while these distinctions provide useful analyses, I ask what might happen if we extend the analysis further to consider how the apparent ‘negatives’ and ‘positives’ of each might be being balanced by other activities that the Indigenous companies are involved with.

The predominant forms of foreign policy discussed these days are underpinned by an assumption of Crown sovereignty in Aotearoa New Zealand. However, the first diplomatic relations and foreign policy in this country were conducted by hapū and iwi Māori.1 Prior to the 1800s, Māori had a long history of interaction in the Pacific and with other nations. Such interactions were governed by specific legal and political practices and institutions. A number of the concepts upon which these practices and institutions were based included whakapapa (genealogy), utu (balance), mana (respect) and koha (reciprocity).

Indigenous peoples inevitably associate globalization with imperial expansion and the colonization of their territories. One associated scholarly view is that globalization's focus on capital accumulation sets aside indigenous cultural priorities to undermine self-determining authority over lands and resources (Fenelon and Hall, 2008; Friedman, 1999; Kelsey, 2005a, 2005b; Stewart-Harawira, 2005). Alternatively, globalization is an ambiguous paradox also providing significant benefits to indigenous peoples. In two very different Pacific countries, Fiji and New Zealand, the globalization of political and jurisprudential thought on the rights of indigeneity provides a significant counter to state assertions of absolute sovereignty. Globalization creates economic opportunities to reduce indigenous dependence on the state and in its contemporary expression is less significant than domestic factors in inhibiting indigenous aspirations.

The network of diplomatic posts operated by the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (the Ministry) represent New Zealand on the international stage. Staffed by a combination of diplomatic and locally engaged staff, these posts are New Zealand’s face to the world. A small proportion of the diplomatic staff are Māori (indigenous). Māori art and imagery are used extensively throughout these posts. This research examines the use of Māori (people, images and practices) in New Zealand’s diplomacy. In particular, how specific aspects of New Zealand’s diplomatic practice draw on Māori cultural practices or imagery and what is intended or understood by the symbolism inherent in their use. In the context of the wider physical environment utilized by New Zealand’s offshore presence, these issues are considered through the theoretical lenses of diplomatic symbolism, architectural diplomacy, representation and the use of works of art as image building diplomacy. In addition to a series of semi-structured interviews with key Ministry staff and an analysis of relevant documents of interest, case studies are utilized. Two of these examine how New Zealand is physically represented in an overseas posting environment in two Pacific contexts. One, a long-standing diplomatic representation in Rarotonga in the Cook Islands (part of the Realm of New Zealand which is self-governing in free association with New Zealand – with close cultural ties with Māori in New Zealand), and the second in a newer relationship in Noumea, New Caledonia (an overseas territory of France). The final case study – Canberra- considers New Zealand’s close relationship with Australia. Key research findings illustrate the Ministry (and by extension New Zealand) uses various forms of bicultural symbolism (through the use or display of Māori taonga, objects and art forms) to represent New Zealand internationally. In addition, this use of bicultural symbolism does not adequately consider the disconnect between the outward face of the Ministry and the inward realities (specifically related to the position of Māori staff and the Ministry’s policy function). The research contribution will add to knowledge about New Zealand’s diplomatic thought and practice and address the gap in the literature of how New Zealand has used diplomatic symbolism in relation to Māori to express a collective identity as part of New Zealand’s diplomacy.