Reform comes first: tribe

By RUTH BERRY political reporter

Constitutional reform enshrining the Treaty of Waitangi had to occur before the Government could establish a Supreme Court, the country's second biggest tribe said yesterday.

Ngati Porou leader Api Mahuika delivered his message by teleconference to a parliamentary select committee hearing submissions on the proposed final court of appeal.

Sir Tipene O'Regan also raised concerns about successive Governments' reluctance to tackle constitutional issues, when he spoke against the proposal yesterday.

The third submitter, former Court of Appeal president Sir Ivor Richardson, threw his weight behind the plan.

Attorney General Margaret Wilson has yet to gain certain political support for abolishing the Privy Council.

Maori are divided over the issue and the bulk of Maori submissions to the committee have opposed it.

A marae digipoll taken several months ago of 1000 Maori found nearly 40 per cent opposed and 30 per cent in favour. The rest were undecided.

Debate over the issue is set to dominate a national hui on the court's structure, in Taupo starting tomorrow.

Margaret Wilson is expected to attend and may be confronted over concerns that she has failed to adequately consult Maori.

She has previously said the plan would not reduce the status of the Treaty of Waitangi.

But Mr Mahuika said that as they stood the plans would invoke "significant constitutional reform".

The implications for the treaty had not been properly explored, nor had safeguards to protect its status been put in place.

"We have asked for constitutional change ... that guarantees the place and the role of the treaty.

"There is no guarantee under the status quo. For us, constitutional change has to take place first."

Maori and the wider public had not been properly consulted and a referendum should be held, he said.

Te Runanga o Ngati Porou Runanga chief executive Amohaere Houkamau believed most iwi shared this view.

Mr Mahuika said the Privy Council was free from political pressure, a key issue for Maori.

Sir Tipene said tribes had turned to the courts because of the "absence of good law from Parliament".

Successive Parliaments had avoided dealing with the serious constitutional issues, creating a void.

"The more we can properly constitutionalise ourselves the better."

The foreshore and seabed furore had arisen because politicians had failed to properly define customary rights, although the case had been before the courts for years, he said.

The Privy Council offered tribes an objectivity courts here might not because it was "free from the baggage of the New Zealand village".

If the new court were established it should have overseas judges appointed as there was a "small intellectual pool" in New Zealand, Sir Tipene said.

But Sir Ivor disagreed, saying it was important for judges on the final court of appeal to understand New Zealand law and culture.