Submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Foreshore by 9ox54VU

VIEWS: 2 PAGES: 1

									    Submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Foreshore and Seabed
                                      Bill 2004.
July 04TH 2004
                                                                                                                                    1
1. BY WAY OF BACKGROUND Last June 2003 (Court of Appeal), the Government by its own laws &
legislation failed to prove ownership of the foreshore and seabed. In September 2003 a proposed policy/
                                        2                          3
framework was unanimously rejected by te tangata whenua (native aboriginals of New Zealand). This
proposed Bill has been deliberately constructed for the benefit of a few economic criminals. It is designed
to deny the natives of New Zealand rightful revenue for the use of their property since 1840, to stall
historical settlements and to pilfer the rights to 100’s of billions of dollars in oils, minerals, organisms and
activity space from us (te tangata whenua).
2. AND IN DOING SO fundamentally breaches the rule of law, and due process domestically and
internationally which also includes but is not limited to; Magna Carta 1215, Bill of Rights 1688, The
Declaration of Independence 1835, Te Tiriti o Waitangi 1840, section 9 &10 of the Constitutional Act
1846, section 71 of the Queens Imperial Act 1852, section 2(7) Native Districts regulations 1858, Article
17 Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, section 18 Maori Community Development Act 1962,
Article 5 & 6 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
ratified by NZ in 1972, Article 1.1 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by NZ in
1976, section (5) of the Imperial Laws Application Act 1988, section 28 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights
1990, sections 6(e), 7(a) and 8 of The Resource Management Act 1991, Sections 2, 3 and 5 of Te Ture
Whenua Act 1993, Wai 953 2002, Wai 1071 2004.
3. WHEREAS Te Tiriti o Waitangi was signed reciprocally between two sovereign nations and the Crown
not being the only title or sovereign in New Zealand, and that the other being the Native title (derived
from whakapapa) is an indisputable title to the soil held by te tangata whenua. The doctrines of
Feudalism, English Law or Civil Law cannot influence upon the lands (territories) to which the natives of
                                                               4
New Zealand own according to their customs and usages . New Zealand as a common law statute holds
no jurisdiction over customary rights, but under Te Tiriti has a feudal and fiducial duty to preserve such
rights secured exclusively unto us, te tangata whenua. Our indigenous customs, laws and usages are
even enforceable legal rights in the ordinary Courts, irrespective of whether or not Te Tiriti o Waitangi or
                                                                      5
its principles have been expressly incorporated in to legislation.
4. AND WHEREAS common law was introduced to New Zealand, it was adapted to reflect local custom,
including property rights. This was made explicit in New Zealand by the English Laws Act 1858, which
                                                                                                 6
provided that English law was part of the law of New Zealand with effect from 1840 only . The Crown
acquired a radical title only (imperium) , that title was subject to the pre existing property rights of the
natives. These property rights were already recognised from Letters Patent 1840, the Crown could not
acquire freehold title (dominium) in respect of land without the prior consent of the natives.
Interests in the soil below low water mark were known under the laws of England by custom and usage,
these interests were created by Crown grant in New Zealand. The issue of a Crown grant does not
                                                7
amount to extinguishment of the Native Title . Native Title being all rights, powers and privileges prior to
                                                                                                              8
Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the unreviewable prerogative power that the Crown lacks in relation to this title .
5. I SUBMIT UNDER THE NATIVE TITLE ON BEHALF OF TE TANGATA WHENUA (SOVEREIGN)
THE REJECTION OF THE FORESHORE AND SEABED BILL 2004, IN ITS ENTIRETY on the grounds;
(i) I am a direct descendant of and before Te Tiriti o Waitangi and do not give consent.
(ii) Government-Crown is unable to prove conquest or discovery over the dominion of te tangata whenua.
(iii) the Government (settler) is incapable of providing a sanctioned legal constitution of New Zealand
and in doing so, incapable of providing any documentation of its true legal origin of sovereign authority.
(iv) the Government (and its current statutes) holds no legal jurisdiction over the property rights in relation
to the NativeTitle, because the government doesn’t have a Native Title.
(v) the Government cannot produce any evidential documentation, title or deed to contest native authority.
(vi) Parliament does not derive from Te Tiriti o Waitangi, therefore it is not a treaty partner and has no
power to negotiate.

Salutations,
Jason koiauruterangi
1
  Harbours Boards Act 1878 & 1950, Territorial Sea and Fishing Zone Act 1965, the Territorial Sea, Contiguous Zone and Exclusive Economic
Zone Act 1977, and the Foreshore and Seabed Endowment Revesting Act 1991.
2
   Maori customary rights continue unless and until they are extinguished explicitly by statute and the natives freely consent to such
extinguishment [The Queen v Symonds]
3
  ….True people of the soil who still reside within their natural ‘Dominion’,… hold rights exclusively to jurisdiction over all that pertains to
Maori and their natural customs, laws and usages - Hohepa Mapiria
4
  Judge Fenton 1870
5
  Privy Council [Oyekan v Adel ].
6
  Court of Appeal Findings June 2003. Marlborough Sounds/Bell Gully Document
7
  Lord Davey
8
  Tamaki vs Baker / Johnstone vs MacIntosh [Hohepa Mapiria 7 July 2003.]
                                                                                                                            Jason Koia
                                                                                                      175 Tyndall Rd, kaiti , Gisborne.
                                                                                                     Ph 06 8686732 or koia@xtra.co.nz

								
To top