The best law jobs are on LawFuel – Check Here
Over 40 King’s Counsel have written to the Prime Minister and Attorney-General, expressing grave concerns about the proposed Treaty Principles Bill substance and its potential impact on the country’s constitutional arrangements.
The lawyers argue that the bill seeks to rewrite the Treaty of Waitangi itself by redefining its principles in law. They contend that the existing principles, which include partnership, active protection, equity, and redress, are designed to reflect the spirit and intent of the Treaty as a whole and represent settled law.
According to the legal experts, the proposed bill would unilaterally change the meaning of Te Tiriti and its legal effect without the agreement of Māori as the Treaty partner. They warn that this action would offend basic principles underpinning New Zealand’s representative democracy..
The lawyers also highlight specific concerns with the bill’s proposed principles. They argue that Principle 2 retrospectively limits Māori rights to those that existed in 1840, effectively erasing the Crown’s Article 2 guarantee of tino rangatiratanga to Māori. They state that Principle 3 fails to recognize the fundamental Article 2 guarantee of Māori rights to maintain their customs, values, and customary law.
The barristers predict that the bill, if enacted, would cause significant legal confusion and uncertainty, leading to protracted litigation and costs, and would be contrary to the bill’s stated purpose of providing certainty and clarity.
Seymour’s Response
In response to these criticisms, ACT leader David Seymour, the bill’s architect, has defended the legislation. He argues that it does not touch the Treaty but provides an opportunity for all New Zealanders to have a say on what the Treaty means, rather than leaving interpretation solely to the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal.
The Treaty Principles Bill is scheduled for its first reading in Parliament on Thursday, amidst nationwide protests and concerns expressed by various parties, including Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who has described the bill as “divisive”.
