A bill’s marathon public hearing, which seeks to re -interpret the New Zealand’s founder agreement between the Mauriti tribes and the British Crown Prince, began on Monday between mass screaming that the proposed changes were unconstitutional, socially But there are attacks on division and rights.
The bill of the principles of agreements, which was presented to the Parliament through the Minor Coalition Act Party, seeks to abandon a fixed principles that the relations between the Mauriti and the ruling authorities have its own re -fixed principles. Guide in favor.
The Act Party argues that Mauri has been provided with various political and legal rights and privileges against non -Mauriti because the principles that have come out of the contract with Waitangi – New Zealand’s founder document that maintains the rights of Mauri. Plays an important role.
The proposal has given rise to severe criticism from lawyers, educationists and the public, who believe the principles of the Act will weaken the rights and remove the check on the crown. It has encouraged mass meetings of Mauriti leaders, and is the largest protest on the rights of Mauriti.
Sir Edward Thakuri Dori, a former High Court judge, helped establish the Vietnam Tribunal – which was an institution set up to investigate the violations of the contract – told the committee that the bill helped help prepare principles For the tribunal’s 50 -year work.
He said that if this bill was passed, “our government would be the laughter of the Western world, which understands how the responsible states today want to handle relations with their locals.”
Former National Party agreement negotiating Minister Christopher Finalson told parliament The committee had “misused” the bill.
“It tries to enhance many principles that do not just reflect the relationship between the crown and the fed [people of the land]“He said.
On the first day of the public hearing on Monday, Act leader David Seymor told the committee that the principles of the agreement have led to a society of unequal rights.
“Dividing people into ethnic groups is a definition of racism,” he said, adding that it is moving New Zealand towards absoluteism.
After Semour, dozens of speakers followed it, including a few handfuls, who supported the bill and the overwhelming majority highlighted its failures.
Political scientist Dr. Braun Wayne Hord told the committee that the party’s rhetoric is dangerous.
“This basic wage is exploiting politics – it increases dissatisfaction and anger, and it is incredibly difficult for the country to manage political and extreme discrimination,” said Heward.
Former politician Dam Marilyn Warring warned that the bill would overtake decades of development for Mauri, who was backward than non -Mauriti. “Where a person or public is suffering from socially constructed, historical, systematic and systematically accumulated losses, equality cannot be achieved through equal treatment,” he said.
Local politics scholar Dr Arti Metomet said the bill was presented by a minority party leader without consultation.
“This is an insult to Mauri … You must first ask what they want, and then talk, so that we should not be forced to put a bill in our throat.”
The bill has also mobilized a historical response from the public, the initial count shows that the Justice Committee has received more than 300,000 requests – which is the highest number of bills in the country’s history.
The bill does not receive extensive support and it is likely that the second reading will fail.
The committee will hear 80 hours of public verbal requests next month, which will be submitted on May 14.
