Chapter 6. Māori Dispute Resolution: Traditional Conceptual Regulators and Contemporary Processes

Jones, Carwyn

doi:10.1515/9780824860967-008

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Māori customary law is not equivalent to tikanga, though the two are inextricably linked. 19 Customary law is guided by principles (also known as "conceptual regulators") that are grounded in the practice of tikanga. Applying these conceptual regulators to overlapping claims disputes allows for the extrapolation of broader legal principles which serve to govern the relationships between groups.…”

Section: Overlapping Rights Through the Lens Of Indigenous Relationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Kia Whakatōmuri Haere Whakamua: Implementing Tikanga Māori as the Jurisdictional Framework for Overlapping Claims Disputes

Morar¹

2021

VUWLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the misconception that overlapping rights to land are always in tension with one another. In this article, I apply a tikanga-based analysis to the policy on overlapping rights that is used in the settlement of historical Treaty of Waitangi claims. I argue that the supremacy of colonial law within the State legal system continues to suppress indigenous relationality and limit the mechanisms for reciprocity. This article problematises the following claims made about overlapping claims disputes. First, that overlapping rights are too complex for judicial resolution. This article examines the ways in which overlapping rights are capable of co-existing to preserve relationships between different iwi and hapū. Second, that tikanga is a contestable system of law and should not be regarded as a question of law or as a jurisdictional framework for resolving such disputes. This article critically analyses the extent to which these claims are based on the supremacy of colonial law within the State legal system by considering the application of tikanga in the courts and alternative dispute resolution processes. I argue that tikanga Māori is the only applicable framework whereby differences can be mediated in a way that preserves the relationships between the parties and provides redress mechanisms for continuing reciprocity. This article concludes that the State legal system at present continues to delegitimise indigenous relationality in ways that amalgamate rights into a colonial recognition framework, which fails to recognise tikanga Māori as an equal system of law in Aotearoa New Zealand.

show abstract

Section: Overlapping Rights Through the Lens Of Indigenous Relationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Kia Whakatōmuri Haere Whakamua: Implementing Tikanga Māori as the Jurisdictional Framework for Overlapping Claims Disputes

Morar¹

2021

VUWLR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Chapter 6. Māori Dispute Resolution: Traditional Conceptual Regulators and Contemporary Processes

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Kia Whakatōmuri Haere Whakamua: Implementing Tikanga Māori as the Jurisdictional Framework for Overlapping Claims Disputes

Kia Whakatōmuri Haere Whakamua: Implementing Tikanga Māori as the Jurisdictional Framework for Overlapping Claims Disputes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About