KEY POINTS:
A woman trying to prevent her husband's deportation by having him declared a taonga, or treasure, is badly advised and wasting her time, according to an academic.
A Waitangi Tribunal judge has refused to hear Rosina Hauiti's case, arguing the tribunal was not a forum for immigration decisions, but Ms Hauiti has been reported to have been considering reapplying.
Treaty expert Paul Moon said today that the couple's lawyer, Tuariki Delamere, lacked an understanding of the treaty process and there was a danger that a great deal of time and effort would be invested by Ms Hauiti for absolutely no benefit to her cause.
Ms Hauiti argued that her husband Mofuike Fonua, who is Tongan, was a taonga and therefore decisions affecting him would affect her Treaty rights.
Professor Moon said Mr Delamer e was using Article Two of the Treaty but was totally misguided.
Article Two refers specifically to property rights. The list of properties includes lands, estates, forests, fisheries, villages and other properties or treasures.
By claiming that a husband was taonga under the Treaty, a person was being converted into a piece of property. This was neither the intention of the Treaty's British authors, nor the understanding of the Maori signatories, Professor Moon said.
- NZPA
