Constitutional foundations (part 2)

Last week I briefly reviewed the Pa¯keha¯ concept (sovereignty) and site (Parliament) of power under which this country’s constitutional foundations have been partially authorised. This week I review the Ma¯ ori concept (mana) and site (rangatiratanga) of power that preceded it all.

Mana, as a concept of power, and rangatiratanga, as the site of that power, were primarily sourced and maintained in hapu¯ relationships with deity; they still are. They were also expressly designed to sustain te ao taiao (the natural world), which in turn sustained te tangata (the people) in a self-renewing and upward cycle of being; they still do.

The cornerstone that gave this concept and site of power both legal structure (a body of laws) and moral authority (a body of values), is tikanga; it still does.

While rangatiratanga is a jural construct, and “people-bestowed”, it is also tikangadependent. The relationship between tikanga and mana, between constitution and authority to make political decisions, is both symbiotic and essential to the maintenance of law and order.

Tikanga ensures the smooth functioning of the hapu¯ polity, and provides the stability needed to promote harmonious relationships or to restore them when they are disrupted by conflict. It is a constitutional imperative that cannot be divorced from the practicalities of political power.

Tikanga supported, informed and gave constitutional structure and meaning to the rangatiratanga interactions of the hapu¯ with the new iwi (Pa¯ keha¯ ) who arrived in their rohe from the early 1800s onwards.

It continues to support, inform and give constitutional structure and meaning to hapu¯ rangatiratanga interactions with Pa¯keha¯ to this day.

As such, tikanga informed the founding documents of this country - He Hakaputanga o Te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (He Hakaputanga) 1835 and Te Tiriti o Waitangi 1840 - and has continued to flow in an unbroken stream through every internationally recognised human rights instrument that New Zealand has signed up to since 1840.

That brings me to the thing that catalysed this review – the upgrade and redesign of the Far North District Council’s east coast wastewater treatment system at Taipa¯ , in the rohe of Matakairiri and Nga¯ ti Whata hapu¯ .

After being partially treated the waste is pumped over the hill into the waterways of Nga¯ ti Tara hapu¯ , from whence it flows out through Aurere into Tokerau (Doubtless Bay), affecting every hapu¯ of Nga¯ ti Kahu, all of whom opposed the system’s design and location from its inception in the 1980s. They still do.

The vast majority of them aren’t even connected to it, but they still have to deal with the waste that flows from it.

Until recently, most Pa¯keha¯ governing agencies only saw their concept and site of power as having any constitutional authority when it came to that system.

While that is changing, there is still a long way to go before we reach a co-designed solution. Integral to reaching that point is the need to understand and agree on our constitutional foundations.

The relationship between tikanga and mana, between constitution and authority to make political decisions, is both symbiotic and

essential to the maintenance of law and

order