Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
New Zealand Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence |
Last Updated: 24 April 2015
Ngaˉ Tikanga Maˉ ori and the Courts
Judge Stephanie Milroy*
Tēnā koutou e rau rangatira mā, Te Arikinui, ngā mihinui ki a koe.1
Firstly, I would like to acknowledge everyone who is here today, old
students, past colleagues, past whaea and new whaea. It is enjoyable
to be here
on this particular occasion as it is the first symposium on tikanga that we have
had and what a wonderful opportunity
for the Law School to really firm up the
promise that was made when this Law School actually first began.
In the beginning, Ani Mikaere was meant to be halftime as a liaison with the
local Māori community and the wider catchment area
that the University had.
However, she and I were the only Māori teachers at the school, we had all
sorts of teaching, all sorts
of responsibilities to our students and it became
apparent very quickly that she wouldn’t be able to fulfill that role, that
we needed more Māori to be able to do that. It’s wonderful to see
that a really good idea that we had at the beginning
has started to emerge now.
It has taken time but it is happening.
I am speaking first in this session because I have just started this new job
that has thrown up a whole lot of issues for me. I don’t
have a whole lot
of answers, but what I do have are a whole lot of questions and I hope your
comments will be able to help me in
my current position. In particular, some of
the questions that I have are about tikanga and its place in the courts. So, I
have some
stories to tell and some questions to ask you that you may or may not
be able to answer. Some of my colleagues from the Māori
Land Court, who are
present today, have already asked a number of questions that I wanted to discuss
with you so we’ll move
on from there.
I wanted to ask how many of you here today have attended a court or seen a
court process? The show of hands indicates that about 50
per cent of you here
today have seen the court process. For those of you who haven’t attended a
court proceeding, it is a really
strange experience for anybody. On the one hand
you go into a court, the Māori Land Court which talks about Māori land
– a subject really dear to our hearts. With the exception of the Judge in
the past, all the people that were there were Māori.
What was
happening
* Judge Stephanie Milroy of the Māori Land Court, Hamilton is from Tūhoe and Te Arawa.
Before taking up her role as judge, Judge Milroy was a Senior Lecturer at the Waikato Law
School.
1 This is a greeting to those present and to the late Te Arikinui, Dame
Te Atairangikaahu.
16 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
Vol 10
was something that was completely foreign and, as a Judge I feel as though I
have a split personality. On the one hand I have all
this Pākehā law,
let’s face it the Ture Whenua Māori Act is imposed by a
Pākehā institution and it
is imposed upon Māori land and
that’s what we are administering in the courts. At the same time I can
understand some
of the real issues, the issues that are happening to our people,
the context of the problems that people are trying to struggle with
and
hopefully what will come out of today’s hui will provide some answers to
the questions I pose.
All I have are questions, and as I said before I have this split personality
to deal with. I would like to talk about the court process
first. One of the
things that people had mentioned in the past was a way of making the court more
welcoming for Māori. We recognize
that this is a foreign imposed
institution. But how can we make it so that Māori are, at least, able to
articulate their issues
and feel that they are being listened and that their
voices are heard?
Some initiatives that we have tried to implement are to encourage the use of
te reo Māori, especially under Chief Judge Williams
who is fluent and is a
wonderful speaker of and in te reo Māori. The Māori Land Court begins
each court session with a
karakia and also there is the possibility of having
marae based sittings. As stated earlier some things are better discussed on the
marae than in the courtroom. However with all those initiatives there are
related issues such as te reo Māori. Some of the people
who come to the
courts are fluent in te reo and find it much easier to speak in te reo and we
encourage them to speak in whatever
language they are most comfortable with.
Then you have others who have a partial or no understanding of te reo and who
are the other
party. Then you have the Judge who must be able to understand and
translate te reo later if they need to for the parties in court.
But it is the
other parties who may not have an understanding of te reo who will respond in
English. There is an immediate problem
there – both in the way that
they’re presenting their cases which to me is always going to sound less
authoritative in
terms of saying ‘this is the way we’ve done things
and therefore this is our agreement’ it sounds less authoritative
in
English than in Māori when talking about tikanga on the marae, or marae
protocol. In some circumstances speaking English
can sometimes be advantageous.
So we’re starting to talk about the commercial, the business aspects,
getting in advisors to
advise you about your business, those very commercial
aspects where English is the language. So there are issues which surround which
language will be used in which circumstances.
2007 Ngä Tikanga Mäori and the Courts
17
Karakia
I really like to start court with karakia (prayer) as it makes me feel safe
and makes me feel like someone is watching over me. After
all I am only human.
There is something else there that would help me during the court sitting.
However, there have been some situations
which have arisen where some people
have felt very uncomfortable with karakia and have left the court room until the
karakia was
finished and then have come back into the court room. It is part of
their faith. It is not a matter of disrespect for the court or
anything like
that but because we’ve diverged over the centuries that we have had
colonization we haven’t got an accepted
standard of behaviour that is
going to work in every situation. Again that is an example of a possible issue,
though not one for
the courts, as those that feel uncomfortable with karakia
have the option of leaving the room and returning once karakia has
finished.
Marae sittings
As I have said before, there are advantages to marae sittings2 as
there are things that people would feel more comfortable with if they were
happening in marae sittings. The context is clear, as
the kuia said earlier,
people can see what is happening right there on the marae. There was a case
where there had been a request
to the court to go out and have a meeting with
the people on the marae. The court declined that request because things had
gotten
so heated that the court thought that a neutral venue would be the only
place to hold the court sitting. The reason the request was
made to have a
sitting on the marae was because the party that made the initial request wanted
the people to see the state of the
land, they wanted people to see what this
person had done or not done to the land in relation to keeping up their lease.
There is
that sort of issue as well.
There is also the issue that it may be more difficult for the home people who
are most likely to be affected by a decision in the
court to attend a court
sitting as opposed to attending a sitting on a marae. Should there be Saturday
or Sunday sittings? Although
this would be something I would be reluctant to do,
a lot of people work and they would be excluded from attending a court sitting
and hearing. What has been happening to their land when sittings are held on
weekdays? There are those disadvantages but we have
also got some issues for the
court and I’ll just go through some of those issues. For instance,
I’m not used to being
welcomed specifically. It is a relatively new thing
for me. It never occurred to me that people clean up their marae, get the
kitchen
going, organise all those things that happen behind the scenes in
preparation for a marae sitting. In fact there is so much work
and preparation
that has to
2 A marae is a traditional meeting place.
18 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
Vol 10
done beforehand so that they are in a state of readiness, just to get the
court to go to their marae. This raises the question of
whether or not we should
be imposing that kind burden on the people of that marae. When we go to the
marae, we take a number of staff
who are hungry people. So much work goes into
the organization of having a court sitting on a marae which places a burden on
the
people to feed and take care of the court contingent.
Then there are issues which one of my staff members raised before this hui.
If you are sitting in the wharenui3 are you going to allow the judge
to have a drink of water? Are you going to let the judge have peppermints? These
issues seem small
things, but where I come from you’re not allowed those
things in the wharenui, but there are times when a judge needs these
kinds of
things. The whaea mentioned this morning that there are instances where court
protocol and court kawa take over from the
kawa of the marae and the protocol of
the marae. So how can one feel comfortable as a Māori saying to a kaumatua
‘No,
sit down. It’s not your turn yet, it’s this
person’s turn’. There are all these kinds of issues that
arise.
Some of the other types of issues that I have thought about are that a court
sitting is normally recorded. We record everything that
is said. Is that what
people want when we’re talking on a marae or is that a place where we want
frank and free discussion
that will come out in the minutes in black and white
for everybody to see later on?
I’ve already mentioned before that sometimes you do need to have a
neutral area. Sometimes things become too difficult, too
heated and they need to
be taken out of that area and put in a place where people can begin to converse
in a civil way. The other
thing is that the very court process is not conducive
to consensus building. Mediation – that’s a different situation.
Again the court is looking to see whether mediation can be used more widely than
it is. When you’re talking about an actual
court sitting where a judge is
taking evidence from one side and taking evidence from another side, then
decides you’re the
winner, you are the loser, that’s not conducive
to building community feeling at a marae sitting. So those are some of the
problems for the court in trying as I said to incorporate a more Māori face
to what we are doing. That’s the process.
There are other issues as well
which may be dealt with during the course of this hui.
3 A wharenui literally is a large house, usually an ancestral house, and
according to the laws and values of many Māori
tribes, it is culturally
inappropriate to eat food or drink inside these
houses.
2007 Ngä Tikanga Mäori and the Courts
19
Now in terms of the actual substance of what we are dealing with, as I
mentioned earlier, there are some situations especially when
you’re
dealing with trusts. Some of these trusts are huge. There are some
incorporations which are very wealthy – but
they are more or less a
handful. Now for those trusts and incorporations that are wealthy, they are run
like businesses. They are
making decisions about payment dividends, how much
should be paid for grants, how much for marae and so on, but they are basically
running as a business. In that sort of situation the Pākehā law, I
think, is what applies. That is what they are using,
that’s how they are
operating.
An example where tikanga may come into the equation is if your trust is
making a profit so that you are able to make payments, to
pay out dividends, how
much do you reserve for ongoing developments, increasing your business and so
on, and how much do you pay
out to the beneficial owners. Remember the trustees
are not necessarily the beneficiaries or owners. Is it the job of the trustees
to run a ‘spic and span’ business, up to the minute model business?
Or is it that they should be making more payments
as dividends to the actual
owners so that they can benefit from the profits. So that is an area where what
you are weighing up is
business efficacy against the social and domestic needs
of the people who are actually going to be affected by those decisions?
Fortunately,
that’s a problem for the trustees and not normally for the
courts.
There are also situations where tikanga plays a huge role and I think the
situation which my colleague brought up earlier, where marae
trustees, marae
committees or the beneficiaries of a marae, in all of those situations and
issues they have come to be involved in,
they get to the point where they feel
they need to come to court to get direction, to get decisions. The difficulty
for me is that
it just seems so wrong that the court makes the decision. The
marae is the centre of our life as Māori, that is where the decisions
should be made, that is where the rangatiratanga is. The leadership is there,
but the court is being asked to intervene in those
situations. I think that we
have been asked to intervene partly because there is that issue of an imposed
system. The trustees may
differ from the kaumātua, who may differ from the
marae committees. That certainly is a part of it. I think the other issues
revolve around the fact that a lot of people affiliate to marae, like myself,
who are not the home people, they are not the people
who are going to be there
doing the cooking, the cleaning, organizing for tangi all of those kinds of
things but who still have a
real interest in that marae. Then you have people
who are just beginning the journey of finding their roots again. They are all
keen
and enthusiastic and they want to get in there and take over. While you
don’t want to discourage them, they still have to learn
a few
things.
20 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
Vol 10
So there are those sorts of dynamics, where you have the home people and a
new group of people who have a real interest in the marae
and who have good
ideas and enthusiasm but the way they do things in terms of tikanga may be a bit
‘rusty’. Then there
are things like people misunderstanding what
their roles are as trustees of a marae. In the western legal world it is very
clear
what the trustees’ roles are. They administer and manage the marae.
They are the governance body of the marae. But what does
that have to do with
the kaumātua of the marae? Who are the people who are going to be talking
on the marae, doing whaikōrero?
Those are different roles but people have
misunderstood the difference and that they may be overlapping roles. Sometimes I
think
they believe that certain roles have certain mana attached to them. I
think it depends on how you look at it. Some people think that
there is mana
involved in being a trustee. Then there are others that think their mana comes
from their tūpuna and that they
don’t need to have a particular
label.
There are other examples where there have been situations where the people of
the marae have said they want young people who have
lots of energy, lots of
enthusiasm who want to go forward who can make all these applications for
funding and so forth, and build
us a lovely new wharenui and help us with our
Māori health and so forth and these old trustees they haven’t done
anything.
Except those old trustees, the kaumātua have been the ones who
have looked after the tikanga aspects of the marae life. What
the people have
done is that they have voted out those trustees and voted in new trustees. For a
start they have voted. What does
that tell us about our leadership structures
our ways of bringing forward leaders now? Then you’ve got all these new
young
ones in and a kaumatua might say, ‘Well no I don’t want to
stand down. I can contribute something and I have waited for
them to come to me
and ask me for my advice, they haven’t. They’ve just ignored
me.’ It brings up those issues
of old ways of doing things, expectations,
versus newer ways, it comes back to those things that we were talking about
earlier –
the compromises that have been made and the changes that are
occurring because our whole way of life has changed.
Those are some of my questions. The issue of leadership, I think, is central
to what is happening or not happening on marae. That
is not going to be answered
by the court. When I’m sitting there hearing these things especially about
marae, what I want is
for the people to have another go and try and work it out
for themselves. The last thing I want to do is make a decision for people
on
their own marae. Sometimes you have to make a decision otherwise the people get
stuck where they are. From my point of view the
court has got a role in trying
to get people to talk to each other. But there is a point where
you
2007 Ngä Tikanga Mäori and the Courts
21
have to stop and say sorry this is how is how it is going to be. But it
should go back to the marae and should be up to us, as Māori,
to start
figuring out how to deal with some of these issues.
Some other things for me, I can never get a straight answer about tikanga
from my father. He never teaches me by telling me, he teaches
me by showing me.
That’s how I’ve learnt to act on the marae. Someone will give me an
evil look or some signal that tells
me I’m doing something wrong. That is
quite hard to articulate – all you have to go on is instinct, when you
feel when
something is right or feel when something is going wrong or just
doesn’t feel right. When I’m having to think about a
particular case
where I have to write a decision saying this or that or the next thing,
I’m not in a position to say that this
the is the tikanga of that marae.
Our Chief Judge is trying to get funding and trying to move the court to where
we will be able
to sit with pukenga (experts), Māori experts in tikanga and
reo. Whether we get that – who knows? But certainly I feel
the need to
have local Māori experts to advise us on the tikanga of this area. We had
this Māori appellate court case about
succession where it involves
whāngai. It is clear what the tikanga in the area was in relation to
succession of whāngai;
that they couldn’t succeed to those lands. But
is that the tikanga everywhere or is it changing so we need expert advice on
these issues? Because as we talked about earlier tikanga is different for
different areas and we also have issues of how we are adapting
tikanga to
changing circumstances. What might have happened in the past no longer fits with
our modern notions. A classic example
is notice to owners. So many people have
email, listen to radio or television and they don’t necessarily read the
public notices
in the newspapers, and lots of people aren’t living in the
area where their land is. How do you include all those people and
at the same
time, weigh up the different interests? They have a different view and
perspective from those who are on the land, who
are often owner/shareholders.
The last thing I would like to say is that we are dealing with an imposed system
in terms of our landholding.
I was sitting in court one day when one of the
applicants in talking to his whanaunga was saying ‘look you keep talking
about
majorities and so forth, all this share stuff has been imposed on us
anyway but we’re stuck with it and let’s get on
with it because
I’ve got better things to do!’
oPen Discussion
Question: I hear you say you want whānau to work out their
differences before they come to court and as a last resort you will hand down
a
judgment only if you have to. So what sorts of things do you think that we
should bring to the court to seek judgment on?
22 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
Vol 10
Response: That’s usually easy to tell. You ask them to have a
meeting amongst themselves and they come back and either they have an answer
or
it’s just the same argument again. You know when they have gotten as far
as they can on an issue.
Question: What sort of practical support do you offer at the courts
now when the people can’t reach a resolution for themselves? What
kind of
support do you give them?
Response: There are various stages that we look at. One is where we
ask them to go away and hold their own meeting. That often works. Sometimes
the
situation has gotten to the point where it’s obvious that they can’t
move on from where they are because there is
just too much raruraru [trouble].
So the court will organize a meeting and provide a facilitator from a member of
the court staff
to chair the meeting who will provide information about the
court processes and also take notes, take attendances and so forth. I
haven’t myself done this but the Chief Judge has also offered to be a
mediator in some situations and I think other judges
have offered. So rather
than have a court officer holding the meeting the judges themselves may offer to
mediate. Sometimes it works
and sometimes it doesn’t. That’s about
all that we have got on offer at the moment.
Question: Can I ask you, why is it necessary to bring tikanga
Māori into the Māori Land Court? It is an extremely dangerous thing
to
do. The Māori Land Court redefined us, re-ordered us, restructured us and
my fear is that when we appoint experts, some of
those experts are pretty
doubtful. Why do we have to do that? Do you have reservations about taking our
tikanga into the Māori
Land Court? Do you ever wonder what might happen to
our tikanga?
Response: I do have great reservations about taking tikanga into the
court. In some respects it’s easier for me to say, ‘This is
the law.
This is the Act. This is what my jurisdiction is. I can’t do what
you’re asking because the Act doesn’t
allow me to. Therefore this is
what the answer is.’ It is easier for me as a Judge to rely on the law to
say this is how it’s
going to be. That’s what I do. Depending on the
situation, sometimes it’s very hard to know what the tikanga is in many
ways, because there are competing principles. So, I agree with you. It is very
difficult and very dangerous but the fact is, it comes
in through the door
because the people who come into the courts bring it with them. And then
it’s a matter of the court accepting
it and trying to demonstrate that
this is the law, here’s your situation. I can’t always throw it back
to them for them
to go away and try and figure out a solution for themselves. I
think that the only safe way for the court, structured the way it
is and set up
the
2007 Ngä Tikanga Mäori and the Courts
23
way it is can operate safely. Then when people come saying they can’t
find a solution for themselves, I’m relieved that
there is a law there to
say this is how it’s going to be.
Question: I wanted to ask you, do you actually believe that the
coloniser’s law, the coloniser’s institutions have a place in our
lives. If you believe so, can you tell us why you believe it, if you don’t
believe so, can you tell us why not and tell us
exactly what it is you are
doing?
Response: That’s a really curly question. I have to be honest
and say that yes I do think that the colonizer’s law does have a place
in
our lives. Apart from the fact that if you break the law by being civilly
disobedient, specifically you are going to be arrested
and dealt with by the
coloniser’s law. I know that there is the political stance that needs to
be taken which says ‘this
is the coloniser’s law, we’re
operating under tikanga Māori’. At the same time there is a very
practical side
of it that certain penalties will be imposed. That’s in the
general courts. I think you need to be able to do both. At the
moment we are
required to do both. For the Māori Land Court the fact is, just to use an
example, I said that things like shareholdings,
voting, majorities, are part of
an imposed system. However for people like my mother, she views the shareholding
system as a connection
to her father, a reason for her being able to go back to
her land. We have invested that imposed system with a symbolic meaning,
a
spiritual meaning. I’m not sure how to answer that question. It’s
just that for me having to deal with it, it’s
a reality.
Response (from a kuia from the floor): I don’t have a question.
It is an answer. You’ve been put into a corner and I thank you. It is very
important that they
have a choice of one or the other. And you being the
Māori, you must know what is one and what is the other and where you can
be
flexible and where you can’t be flexible. To me that question was full of
anger. Because it put you into a position where
you had to make a decision and
it’s not you that makes the decision it’s the people.
Question: I was just thinking as an 18 year old when I worked in the Māori Land Court, in those days there were no women judges. I can remember being told by one of the tupuna who came in to ask for his take, when he saw me opening the list of owners he was absolutely horrified that I was allowed to touch the list of owners of other people from other tribes. I said to him, take me in to a corner and do a karakia over me. But this is my work, I have to do it. He did that. He did a karakia over me and 41 years in the government, I’m still here. The crux of my kōrero to help them is that I learnt that the role of the Māori Land Court is an advocational one. The role of the District Court is an adversarial one. That’s my answering you. Don’t let yourself get caught up in their take [issues], just put the ball back into their court.
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/journals/NZYbkNZJur/2007/5.html