Learning about the Treaty of Waitangi

The Sixth of February is a public (national) holiday in New Zealand known as Waitangi Day (roughly pronounced "why-tang-ee). The holiday is named for the Treaty of Waitangi that was signed on 6 February 1840 and serves as one of the founding documents for the modern New Zealand state. 

The Treaty of Waitangi also happens to have fascinating -- and highly controversial -- history. The basic story as I understand it is that in 1840 the British Crown wanted to assert formal governance over New Zealand, and entered into a pact with a number of Maori iwi (or tribes). But there were some problems, as this brief summary provided to me as part of my fellowship orientation this week aptly highlights:

The Treaty of Waitangi has two texts, one Māori and one English. The English text is not an exact translation of the Māori text. Despite the problems caused by the different versions, both represent an agreement in which Māori gave the Crown rights to govern and to develop British settlement, while the Crown guaranteed Māori full protection of their interests and status, and full citizenship rights.

As a former lawyer, I shudder when reading that second sentence. Because as it turns out, the initial translation of the Treaty of Waitangi was slipshod at best. While the British thought they were basically getting the right to assert "sovereignty" over all of New Zealand, sovereignty was translated as "kawantanga" in the Maori version of the treaty -- roughly, "governorship." Yet in previous documents presented to the Maori, sovereignty had been translated as "mana," which is a much broader word that comes closer to capturing western notions of sovereignty and dominion. It's a basic rule of statutory interpretation that if you omit the use of one word in favor of another, you've signaled an intent to change the meaning of the text -- but what change was signaled here? It appears New Zealand is still trying to tease out a satisfactory answer to that question. 

Just as interesting (at least to me) is another translation issue that arose in Article Two of the treaty. This provision, according the English version of the text, guaranteed the Maori "the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties" -- in other words, all physical things. But the Maori text of the Treaty guaranteed "te rino rangatiratanga o ratou wenua kainga me o ratou taonga katoa," which (more accurately translated) assured the Maori chiefs they would have "unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures." (My emphasis) Treasure, arguably, goes beyond just physical stuff and indeed, in subsequent years Maori argued that the Treaty protects intellectual property too, such as the Maori language.

As an aside, I think this is one of the coolest things about New Zealand. English and Maori are both official languages here and it's very common for speakers to address crowds briefly in Maori before switching to English. This effort to build a sense of multicultural identity is surely incomplete and ongoing, but the commitment to try -- at least to my outsider's eyes -- seems genuine. 

Given the Treaty's importance to the creation of modern New Zealand, and the rich instructional opportunities posed by the controversy surrounding it, you'd think it be a central part of the New Zealand education curriculum, right? But according to Kura Moeahu, the leader of a Maori marae (roughly, communal gathering place) who spoke to me as part of my fellowship orientation, the Treaty was hardly taught during his schooling. To be candid, I was quietly skeptical of this claim until the non-Maori New Zealand family of educators that's presently letting me stay with them confirmed over dinner that, nope, the Treaty isn't really studied in depth in primary or secondary school. 

Perhaps these experiences are outliers, but I can't help but think of another idea Kura Moeahu suggested during our time with him. He asked, "What would a treaty between the US and the Maori look like today? What could we do?" What a great civics question! And wouldn't it be interesting to see how New Zealand students and US students -- including Maori and Native American students -- would answer that question? What sort of treaty might they draft for adults to consider? 

(With digital tools, we might be able to find out.)