Tino Rangatiratanga
This paper discusses tino rangatiratanga, which is central to a Maori understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi. It refers to Maori control of all things Maori – Maori sovereignty. Tino rangatiratanga stands in contrast to kawanatanga, which Maori have always seen as giving only limited power to the Crown. However history has seen the displacement of tino rangatiratanga by a form of kawanatanga, which assumes that the Crown has absolute authority over all people and all matters in this land.
The Meaning of Tino Rangatiratanga
The word rangatiratanga comes from the word rangatira, which is most often translated as chief. Rangatiratanga, which refers to chieftainship, approximates to oversight, responsibility, authority, control or sovereignty. The word tino is an intensive or superlative, meaning variously: very, full, total, absolute. So tino rangatiratanga approximates to total control, complete responsibility, full authority or absolute sovereignty.
The term tino rangatiratanga was used in the Declaration of Independence of 1835, which recognised Nu Tireni (New Zealand) to be a sovereign and independent nation where power and authority rested with the rangatira. The English version of that declaration stated that “all sovereign power and authority resided entirely and exclusively” in the rangatira.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi of 1840 also used the term tino rangatiratanga with the promise that it would be guaranteed to Maori. As Maori were still signing the Declaration of Independence up to six months before the Treaty, it is clear that the same meaning for te tino rangatiratanga was/can be applied in the second article of the Treaty of Waitangi. Further evidence for this can be found in the missionary translation of the Lord’s Prayer into Maori where the kingdom of God is translated as “rangatiratanga”.
In the words of the English translation of the Maori version of the Treaty, the Queen agreed to the rangatira and the iwi retaining full chieftainship (tino rangatiratanga) of their lands, their villages and all their taonga including the Maori way of life. This interpretation means considerably more than “the full, exclusive, and undisturbed possession of their lands, estates, forests, fisheries, and other properties” in the second article of the English text of the Treaty of Waitangi. In terms of the Maori text the sovereign right of Maori was confirmed not ceded.
It is mostly the Maori text that Maori talked about, signed, and have understood. It was the Maori text that the Crown presented for signature. Furthermore it is a basic tenet of international law that in any bilingual treaty when the differences arise between two language versions, precedence is given to the text that is not in the language of the drafter. This is known as the rule of “contra proferentum”.
Rangatiratanga and Kawanatanga
The Maori version of the Treaty of Waitangi clearly confirmed tino rangatiratanga or Maori sovereignty over all things Maori (Article 2). It granted to the Crown kawanatanga (being a transliteration of the word governorship (Article 1)). Maori would have been in no doubt as to the meaning of rangatiratanga and, on the basis of its being guaranteed in the Treaty, willing to sign it. In 1840 Maori had no desire and no need to give away their tino rangatiratanga. What they gave to the Crown was limited power to control new settlers. That power was kawanatanga. In retaining tino rangatiratanga it was clear to Maori that their ability to control their own destiny was not diminished. In granting kawanatanga they saw that they would benefit from limited controlled immigration and the introduction of new technology.
Article 3 of the Treaty did not make Maori into British subjects. It recognised the continuing right of Maori to enjoy their own laws, customs and lifestyle, just as British citizens enjoyed their own. This was reinforced in Article 4 (unwritten), which stated that the Governor would protect Maori ritenga or custom.
However, the English text of the Treaty which successive governments have relied on to this day for their legitimacy, or their own unilateral proclamation of sovereignty, assumes that Maori gave away all their sovereign power to the Crown. Such an idea would never have been acceptable to Maori. 200,000 Maori had no need whatever to concede any power to just 2,000 settlers. They signed the Maori text because they knew what it meant. Their tino rangatiratanga was retained.
On the incorrect assumption that Maori ceded sovereignty (tino rangatiratanga), successive governments have set about usurping tino rangatiratanga. The denial of the right of tino rangatiratanga since 1840 has been expressed in legislation, decisions of the Courts, and in attempts to rewrite the Treaty in the form of principles.
The Labour Government redefined the Treaty in 1989 with its ‘Principles of Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi’. In brief, these are:
1. The Kawanatanga Principle. The government has the right to govern and to make laws.
2. The Rangatiratanga Principle. The iwi have the right to organise as iwi, and, under the law, to control their resources as their own.
3. The Principle of Equality. All New Zealanders are equal before the law.
4. The Principle of Reasonable Co-operation. Both the government and the iwi are obliged to accord each other reasonable co-operation on major issues of common concern.
5. The Principle of Redress. The government is responsible for providing effective processes for the resolution of grievances in the expectation that reconciliation can occur.
While clearly evolved from the principles of the Treaty as defined by the courts, these were the principles propagated by the then Government as a matter of executive policy. The so-called kawanatanga principle reaffirmed the notion of cession of sovereignty by Maori and assumed that they gave up their right to self determination. Both of these have been constantly refuted by Maori. The so-called rangatiratanga principle redefined rangatiratanga as a concept of resource management that excludes ideas of social, economic or political power for Maori. Others of these principles limit rangatiratanga to a power subject to the authority of the Crown, require reasonable co-operation with the Crown and justify the imposition of English Common Law as a basis for equality.
National rewrote Labour’s set of Treaty principles in the early 90′s so they would conform to its policies and be more explicit. Kawanatanga now referred to the governments ‘right and responsibility to govern for the common good’. Rangatiratanga became ‘restoration of iwi self-management within the scope of the law’. In other words, recognition of tino rangatiratanga is strenuously denied.
Facebook comments: