Turia Tariana: General Debates 
Turia Tariana: General Debates 
[Volume:619;Page:15258] 
TARIANA TURIA (Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 I was interested to read an article in  
Te Nupepa o te Tairawhiti 
entitled “The Treaty of Waitangi—The Legal Perspective”. The article stated: “The Treaty of Waitangi and what it means what happened after its signing and the implications of section 71 of the New Zealand Constitution Act 1852 could it may be argued be seen as evidence that many Maori rights existed and continued into the new legal order. This information is absolutely vital for underpinning our constitutional basis as a nation. Our country is desperately in need of information to identify the nature of rights which existed for tangata whenua prior to the treaty in order to establish means by which to continue these rights into the new legal system. It is indeed a call for enshrining the treaty into a written constitution for Aotearoa New Zealand.” 
The writer of this article is one of our leading lights of the judiciary. She is the kaiwhakawa of the Tai RawhitiMaori Land Court based at Gisborne. She has been a law lecturer at the University of Waikato and at Victoria University of Wellington. A specialist in international human rights she was also a Harkness Fellow to the USA. Indeed Judge Caren Wickliffe is well qualified to advise us on critical issues of constitutional significance given her legal and academic breadth. 
Judge Wickliffe is also of NgatiPorou descent. It is this last statement that seems to have incurred the wrath of the executive specifically both the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General. Earlier this year the Prime Minister queried the judge’s ability to preside over proceedings from East Coast foreshore and seabed claimants stating that the judge is of NgatiPorou descent and this case concerns NgatiPorou. Such a claim was made with little concern that the  
Cabinet Manual  
specifically instructs that Ministers should not express any views that are likely to be published where they could be regarded as reflecting adversely on the impartiality personal views or ability of any judge. Clearly the Prime Minister considers that the ethnicity of Judge Wickliffe adversely affects her impartiality her personal views and her ability as a judge. 
Then today in the  
Independent 
 the Attorney-General is reported as stating that by virtue of Judge Wickliffe’s connections with NgatiPorou she has a direct interest in the outcome of the judicial applications. Given the sophisticated and complex networks of whakapapa we possess as tangata whenua it would seem that very few Maori judges are actually able to hear a case. Of course what would be fascinating to know is exactly how many cases Judge Wickliffe presided over in Tai Rawhiti that were connected to NgatiPorou and how many times perceptions of bias and allegation have been raised in those previous instances—or is it more to do with the substance of this case? The House will recall that the background to this case is that Judge Wickliffe rejected Crown attempts to prevent East Coast foreshore and seabed claimants from proceeding to a substantive hearing for the case to seek freehold title to about 200 kilometres of coastline between Gisborne and Cape Runaway. The Crown had wanted a stay on the proceedings because of the proposed foreshore and seabed legislation. 
We have here an interesting case of the Crown wanting to control the judiciary and its institutions in light of its own actions to fundamentally undermine the Treat of Waitangi. In referring to the treaty it is essential to consider the nature of the partnership between iwi and hapu the holders of tino rangatiratanga and the Crown. For more than a century the Crown has striven to minimise the importance of this relationship and as a consequence the partnership is in disarray. This is to the advantage of the Crown but the disadvantage of the nation. The partnership has of course been threatened and under intense scrutiny in the aftermath of the introduction of the Foreshore and Seabed Bill. Throughout the course of the submissions received on this bill tangata whenua and tauiwi alike have stated that the actions of this Government have placed increased tension on race relations in this country. 
The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.