Footprints of volcano god help Ma¯ ori make case for ties to land
AFTER a years-long legal battle, an iwi hope they have helped build a framework for Ma¯ ori to have some say over land to which they have strong cultural ties.
The Environment Court in December rejected a bid by a group of farmers and landowners seeking to have more than 83 hectares near Auckland International Airport rezoned to permit development.
The matter had been in front of the courts since the landowners objected to Auckland Council knocking back their proposals for Pu¯ kaki Peninsula in 2016.
But the Environment Court panel closed the door on the appellants after the High Court sent the matter back for clarification, cementing a decision which acknowledged local iwi Te A¯ kitai Waiohua’s ancestral and cultural ties to the land.
Although much of the land on the peninsula no longer belongs to the iwi, the area still has strong ties to their history, whakapapa (genealogy) and mythology.
In the judgment, the court highlighted historic portage links and traditional land use, as well as the mythology ascribing two volcanic craters on the land as the footprints of Mataoho, the volcano god.
Te Akitai ¯ Waiohua spokeswoman Karen Wilson said she was happy with the ruling and wasn’t surprised by the weight the cultural landscape had been given, due to the amount of work done to prove the iwi’s claims.
‘‘It can set a precedent, but you have to have the goods to go with it,’’ Wilson said.
‘‘It will be great for iwi, because they know they have a shot or a chance, but that comes with the responsibility to ensure you give sufficient thought and evidence around your claims.
‘‘We hope [what we have done] could be a how-to guide to put forward those claims.’’
Auckland University’s Dr Kenneth Palmer, who has practised, studied and taught resource management law for decades, said it was an interesting case which reflected ‘‘changing attitudes and an acceptance of Ma¯ ori interests’’.
But although recognition for Ma¯ ori was important, the decision could cause issues when it came to iwi being able to make submissions on land they no longer owned, he said.
Wilson said it was important to note the land was not being taken from owners, merely that the iwi was able to have a say in the decision-making process regarding its future.