radiofree.asia

Category: Civil Society

  • Climate protests to continue despite 170 charged in Newcastle ‘protestival’

    Despite Australia’s draconian anti-protest laws, the world’s biggest coal port was closed for four hours at the weekend with 170 protesters being charged — but climate demonstrations will continue. Twenty further arrests were made at a protest at the Federal Parliament yesterday.

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Wendy Bacon

    Newcastle port, the world’s biggest coal port, was closed for four hours on Sunday when hundreds of Rising Tide protesters in kayaks refused to leave its shipping channel.

    Over two days of protest at the Australian port, 170 protesters have been charged. Some others who entered the channel were arrested but released without charge. Hundreds more took to the water in support.

    Thousands on the beach chanted, danced and created a huge human sign demanding “no new coal and gas” projects.

    Rising Tide is campaigning for a 78 percent tax on fossil fuel profits to be used for a “just transition” for workers and communities, including in the Hunter Valley, where the Albanese government has approved three massive new coal mine extensions since 2022.

    Protest size triples to 7000
    The NSW Labor government made two court attempts to block the protest from going ahead. But the 10-day Rising Tide protest tripled in size from 2023 with 7000 people participating so far and more people arrested in civil disobedience actions than last year.

    The “protestival” continued in Newcastle on Monday, and a new wave started in Canberra at the Australian Parliament yesterday with more than 20 arrests. Rising Tide staged an overnight occupation of the lawn outside Parliament House and a demonstration at which they demanded to meet with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

    News of the “protestival” has spread around the world, with campaigners in Rotterdam in The Netherlands blocking a coal train in solidarity with this year’s Rising Tide protest.

    Of those arrested, 138 have been charged under S214A of the NSW Crimes Act for disrupting a major facility, which carries up to two years in prison and $22,000 maximum fines. This section is part of the NSW government regime of “anti-protest” laws designed to deter movements such as Rising Tide.

    The rest of the protesters have been charged under the Marine Safety Act which police used against 109 protesters arrested last year.

    Even if found guilty, these people are likely to only receive minor penalties.Those arrested in 2023 mostly received small fines, good behaviour bonds and had no conviction recorded.

    Executive gives the bird to judiciary
    The use of the Crimes Act will focus more attention on the anti-protest laws which the NSW government has been extending and strengthening in recent weeks. The NSW Supreme Court has already found the laws to be partly unconstitutional but despite huge opposition from civil society and human rights organisations, the NSW government has not reformed them.

    Two protesters were targeted for special treatment: Naomi Hodgson, a key Rising Tide organiser, and Andrew George, who has previous protest convictions.

    George was led into court in handcuffs on Monday morning but was released on bail on condition that he not return to the port area. Hodgson also has a record of peaceful protest. She is one of the Rising Tide leaders who have always stressed the importance of safe and peaceful action.

    The police prosecutor argued that she should remain in custody. The magistrate released her with the extraordinary requirement that she report to police daily and not go nearer than 2 km from the port.

    Planning for this year’s protest has been underway for 12 months, with groups forming in Brisbane, Adelaide, Melbourne, Canberra Sydney and the Northern Rivers, as well as Newcastle. There was an intensive programme of meetings and briefings of potential participants on the motivation for protesting, principles of civil disobedience and the experience of being arrested.

    Those who attended last year recruited a whole new cohort of protesters.

    Last year, the NSW police authorised a protest involved a 48-hour blockade which protesters extended by two hours. Earlier this year, a similar application was made by Rising Tide.

    The first indication that the police would refuse to authorise a protest came earlier this month when the NSW police successfully applied to the NSW Supreme Court for the protest to be declared “an unauthorised protest.”

    But Justice Desmond Fagan also made it clear that Rising Tide had a “responsible approach to on-water safety” and that he was not giving a direction that the protest should be terminated. Newcastle Council agreed that Rising Tide could camp at Horseshoe Bay.

    Minns’ bid to crush protest
    The Minns government showed that its goal was to crush the protest altogether when the Minister for Transport Jo Haylen declared a blanket 97-hour exclusion zone making it unlawful to enter the Hunter River mouth and beaches under the Marine Safety Act last week.

    On Friday, Rising Tide organiser and 2020 Newcastle Young Citizen of the year, Alexa Stuart took successful action in the Supreme Court to have the exclusion zone declared an invalid use of power.

    An hour before the exclusion zone was due to come into effect at 5 pm, the Rising Tide flotilla had been launched off Horseshoe Bay. At 4 pm, Supreme Court Justice Sarah McNaughton quashed the exclusion zone notice, declaring that it was an invalid use of power under the Marine Safety Act because the object of the Act is to facilitate events, not to stop them from happening altogether.

    When news of the judge’s decision reached the beach, a big cheer erupted. The drama-packed weekend was off to a good start.

    Friday morning began with a First Nations welcome and speeches and a SchoolStrike4Climate protest. Kayakers held their position on the harbour with an overnight vigil on Friday night.

    On Saturday, Midnight Oil front singer Peter Garrett, who served as Environment Minister in a previous Labor government, performed in support of Rising Tide protest. He expressed his concern about government overreach in policing protests, especially in the light of all the evidence of the impacts of climate change.

    Ships continued to go through the channel, protected by the NSW police. When kayakers entered the channel while it was empty, nine were arrested.

    84-year-old great-gran arrested, not charged
    By late Saturday, three had been charged, and the other six were towed back to the beach. This included June Norman, an 84-year-old great-grandmother from Queensland, who entered the shipping channel at least six times over the weekend in peaceful acts of civil disobedience.

    The 84-year-old protester Jane Norman
    The 84-year-old protester Jane Norman . . . entered the shipping channel at least six times over the weekend in peaceful acts of civil disobedience. Image: Wendy Bacon/MWM

    She told MWM that she felt a duty to act to protect her own grandchildren and all other children due to a failure by the Albanese and other governments to take action on climate change. The police repeatedly declined to charge her.   

    On Sunday morning a decision was made for kayakers “to take the channel”. At about 10.15, a coal boat, turned away before entering the port.

    Port closed, job done
    Although the period of stoppage was shorter than last year, civil disobedience had now achieved what the authorised protest achieved last year. The port was officially closed and remained so for four hours.

    By now, 60 people had been charged and far more police resources expended than in 2023, including hours of police helicopters and drones.

    On Sunday afternoon, hundreds of kayakers again occupied the channel. A ship was due. Now in a massive display of force involving scores of police in black rubber zodiacs, police on jet skis, and a huge police launch, kayakers were either arrested or herded back from the channel.

    When the channel was clear, a huge ship then came through the channel, signalling the reopening of the port.

    On Monday night, ABC National News reported that protesters were within metres of the ship. MWM closely observed the events. When the ship began to move towards the harbour, all kayaks were inside the buoys marking the channel. Police occupied the area between the protesters and the ship. No kayaker moved forward.

    A powerful visual message had been sent that the forces of the NSW state would be used to defend the interests of the big coal companies such as Whitehaven and Glencore rather than the NSW public.

    By now police on horses were on the beach and watched as small squads of police marched through the crowd grabbing paddles. A little later this reporter was carrying a paddle through a car park well off the beach when a constable roughly seized it without warning from my hand.

    When asked, Constable Pacey explained that I had breached the peace by being on water. I had not entered the water over the weekend.

    Kids arrested too, in mass civil disobedience
    Those charged included 14 people under 18. After being released, they marched chanting back into the camp. A 16-year-old Newcastle student, Niamh Cush, told a crowd of fellow protesters before her arrest that as a young person, she would rather not be arrested but that the betrayal of the Albanese government left her with no choice.

    “I’m here to voice the anger of my generation. The Albanese government claims they’re taking climate change seriously but they are completely and utterly failing us by approving polluting new coal and gas mines. See you out on the water today to block the coal ships!”

    Each of those who chose to get arrested has their own story. They include environmental scientists, engineers, TAFE teachers, students, nurses and doctors, hospitality and retail workers, designers and media workers, activists who have retired, unionists, a mediator and a coal miner.

    They came from across Australia — more than 200 came from Adelaide alone — and from many different backgrounds.

    Behind those arrested stand volunteer groups of legal observers, arrestee support, lawyers, community care workers and a media team. Beside them stand hundreds of other volunteers who have cleaned portaloos, prepared three meals a day, washed dishes, welcomed and registered participants, organised camping spots and acted as marshals at pedestrian crossings.

    Each and every one of them is playing an essential role in this campaign of mass civil disobedience.

    Many participants said this huge collaborative effort is what inspired them and gave them hope, as much as did the protest itself.

    Threat to democracy
    Today, the president of NSW Civil Liberties, Tim Roberts, said, “Paddling a kayak in the Port of Newcastle is not an offence, people do it every day safely without hundreds of police officers.

    “A decision was made to protect the safe passage of the vessels over the protection of people exercising their democratic rights to protest.

    “We are living in extraordinary times. Our democracy will not irrevocably be damaged in one fell swoop — it will be a slow bleed, a death by a thousand tranches of repressive legislation, and by thousands of arrests of people standing up in defence of their civil liberties.”

    Australian Institute research shows that most Australians agree with the Council for Civil Liberties — with 71 percent polled, including a majority of all parties, believing that the right to protest should be enshrined in Federal legislation. It also included a majority across all ages and political parties.

    It is hard to avoid the conclusion that it is a fear of accelerating mass civil disobedience in the face of a climate crisis that frightens both the Federal and State governments and the police.

    As temperatures rise
    Many of those protesting have already been directly affected by climbing temperatures in sweltering suburbs, raging bushfires and intense smoke, roaring floods and a loss of housing that has not been replaced, devastated forests, polluting coal mines and gas fields or rising seas in the Torres Strait in Northern Australia and Pacific Island countries.

    Others have become profoundly concerned as they come to grips with climate science predictions and public health warnings.

    In these circumstances, and as long as governments continue to enable the fossil fuel industry by approving more coal and gas projects that will add to the climate crisis, the number of people who decide they are morally obliged to take civil disobedience action will grow.

    Rather than being impressed by politicians who cast them as disrupters, they will heed the call of Pacific leaders who this week declared the COP29 talks to be a “catastrophic failure” exposing their people to “escalating risks”.

    Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was the professor of journalism at University of Technology Sydney (UTS). She worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is a Rising Tide supporter, and is a long-term supporter of a peaceful BDS and the Greens.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Lack of Gaza aid, Israeli impunity puts Palestinians at risk over failed bombs

    Asia Pacific Report

    An aid agency is warning that a lack of aid reaching Gaza is forcing Palestinians to search through destroyed buildings for basic necessities, putting them at risk of death or injury from unexploded bombs.

    “Civilians in Gaza are caught in a relentless cycle of destruction, displacement, and despair,” said the Danish Refugee Council in a new report.

    “Decades of occupation, blockade, and siege have been compounded by the catastrophic use of explosive weapons in one of the world’s most densely populated areas.

    “The human cost is staggering with more than 44,000 people killed, 90 percent of the population displaced, and essential infrastructure obliterated.”

    The report said that civilians were left grappling with “unimaginable risks” from widespread destruction to the deadly legacy of explosive ordinance (EO) contamination.

    “Nearly everyone in Gaza has felt the devastating impact. Homes reduced to rubble, schools and hospitals targeted, and basic services like water and healthcare brought to a standstill,” the report said.

    “Families face a grim reality, uprooted an average of six times, often returning to areas that have seen active fighting which are likely riddled with explosive ordnance.

    War remnants ‘mistaken for toys’
    “Children, tragically, are among the most vulnerable, mistaking deadly remnants of war for toys.”

    This report has exposed the far-reaching consequences of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas in Gaza, “revealing a dire reality for a population trapped in danger”.

    It underscores the devastating toll of impunity and disregard for international humanitarian law, which continues to result in immense suffering of civilians.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Protest photographer John Miller records Hīkoi mō te Tiriti with his historic lens 

    RNZ News

    For almost six decades photographer John Miller (Ngāpuhi) has been a protest photographer in Aotearoa New Zealand.

    From his first photographs of an anti-Vietnam War protest on Auckland’s Albert Street as a high school student in 1967, to Hīkoi mō te Tiriti last week, Miller has focused much of his work on the faces of dissent.

    He spoke of his experiences over the years in an interview broadcast today on RNZ’s Culture 101 programme with presenter Susana Lei’ataua.

    John Miller at RNZ with his camera
    John Miller at the RNZ studio with his Hīkoi camera. Image: Susana Lei’ataua/RNZ

    Miller joined Hīkoi mō te Tiriti at Waitangi Park in Pōneke Wellington last Tuesday, November 19, ahead of its final walk to Parliament’s grounds.

    “It was quite an incredible occasion, so many people,”  74-year-old Miller says.

    “Many more than 1975 and 2004. Also social media has a much more influential part to play in these sorts of events these days, and also drone technology . . .

    “I had to avoid one on the corner of Manners and Willis Streets flying around us as the Hīkoi was passing by.

    “We ended up running up Wakefield Street which is parallel to Courtenay Place to get ahead of the march and we joined the march at the Taranaki Street Manners Street intersection and we managed to get in front of it.”

    Comparing Hīkoi mō te Tiriti with his experience of the 1975 Māori Land March led by Dame Whina Cooper, Miller noted there were a lot more people involved.

    “During the 1975 Hīkoi the only flag that was in that march was the actual white land march flag — the Pou Whenua — no other flags at all. And there were no placards, no, nothing like that.”

    1975 Land march in Pōneke Wellington
    The 1975 Māori Land March in Pōneke Wellington. Image: © John M Miller
    Black and white image of Maori land rights activist Eva Rickard
    Māori land rights activist Tuaiwa Hautai “Eva” Rickard leads the occupation of Raglan Golf Course in February 1978. Image: © John M Miller
    1975 Land march
    The 1975 Māori Land March Image: © John M Miller

    There were more flags and placards in the Foreshore and Seabed March in 2004.

    “Of course, this time it was a veritable absolute forest of Tino Rangatira flags and the 1835 flag and many other flags,” Miller says.

    “Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe flags were there, even Palestinian flags of course, so it was a much more colourful occasion.”

    Tame Iti on the 1975 Land March
    Activist Tame Iti on the 1975 Māori Land March. Image: © John M Miller

    Miller tried to replicate photos he took in 1975 and 2004: “However this particular time I actually was under a technical disadvantage because one of my lenses stopped working and I had to shoot this whole event in Wellington using just a wide angle lens so that forced me to change my approach.”

    Miller and his daughter, Rere, were with the Hīkoi in front of the Beehive.

    “I had no idea that there were so many people sort of outside who couldn’t get in and I only realised afterwards when we saw the drone footage.”

    The Polynesian Panthers at a protest rally in the 1970s.
    The Polynesian Panthers at a protest rally in the 1970s. Image: © John M Miller

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Six Israeli soldiers die by suicide – thousands get mental health treatment, says report

    Asia Pacific Report

    At least six Israeli soldiers have taken their own lives in recent months, the major Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth has revealed, citing severe psychological distress caused by prolonged wars in the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon as the primary cause, Anadolu Agency reports.

    The investigation suggests that the actual number of suicides may be higher, as the Israeli military has yet to release official figures, despite a promise to disclose them by the end of the year.

    The report highlights a broader mental health crisis within the Israeli army.

    Regional tension has escalated due to Israel’s brutal offensive on the Gaza Strip, which has killed more than 44,000 people, mostly women and children, since a Hamas attack last year.

    Thousands of soldiers have sought help from military mental health clinics or field psychologists, with approximately a third of those affected showing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

    According to the investigation, the number of soldiers suffering psychological trauma may exceed those with physical injuries from the war.

    The daily cites experts as saying the full extent of this mental health crisis will become clear once military operations are completed and troops return to normal life.

    About 1700 soldiers treated
    In March, Lucian Tatsa-Laur, head of the Israeli military’s Mental Health Department, told another Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, that approximately 1700 soldiers had received psychological treatment.

    Since October 7 last year, reports Anadolu, Israeli military is alleged to have wiped out families in Gaza, pulverised neighbourhoods, dug up mass graves, destroyed cemeteries, bombed shops and businesses, flattened hospitals and morgues, ran tanks and bulldozers on dead bodies, tortured jailed Palestinians with dogs and electricity, subjected detainees to mock executions, and even raped many Palestinians.

    Exhibiting sadistic behaviour during the genocide, Israeli soldiers have taunted Palestinian prisoners by claiming they were playing football with their children’s heads in Gaza.

    Israeli troops have live streamed hundreds of videos of soldiers looting Palestinian homes, destroying children’s beds, setting homes on fire and laughing, wearing undergarments of displaced Palestinians and stealing children’s toys.

    In their mission to “erase” Palestine, Israeli troops have killed a record number of babies, medics, athletes, and journalists — unprecedented in any war in this century.

    But, said the news agency, now it’s coming with a cost.

    Australia bars former minister
    Meanwhile, former Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked has been banned from entering Australia over fears of “incitement”.

    Shaked, a former MP for the far-right Yamina party, was scheduled to appear at a conference hosted by the pro-Israel Australia Israel and Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC).

    However, the Australian Department of Home Affairs told the former minister on Thursday that she had been denied a visa to travel to the country under the Migration Act.

    The act allows the government to deny entry to individuals likely to “vilify Australians” or “incite discord” within the local community.

    Speaking to Israeli media, Shaked claimed that her ban was due to her vocal opposition to a Palestinian state, reports Middle East Eye.

    She has also previously called for the removal of “all two million” Palestinians from Gaza.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ICC arrest warrants for Israeli leaders ‘wake up call’ for NZ, says Minto

    Asia Pacific Report

    A national New Zealand solidarity movement for Palestine has welcomed the International Criminal Court’s move to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, saying it is a “wake up call” for the coalition government.

    “The warrants mean for the first time Israeli leaders face accountability for war crimes which have been live-streamed on social media for the past 13 months” said national chair John Minto of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).

    “We are waiting for our government to announce it will arrest Netanyahu and Gallant immediately if they set foot in Aotearoa New Zealand.”

    Many countries among the 124 members of the ICC have been quick to declare that they would honour the arrest obligations, among them Canada, France and Italy. Also the European Union’s foreign policy chief said all EU countries should abide by the ruling.

    “These decisions are binding on all states party to the Rome Statute, which includes all EU member states,” said Joseph Borrell.

    Both Israel and its key backer, United States, refuse to recognise the ICC jurisdiction.

    PSNA’s Minto said in a statement today: “It’s a breath of fresh air from the stultifying refusal of New Zealand and other Western governments to act against the perpetrators of industrial-scale slaughter of Palestinian civilians.

    “This ICC decision is a wake-up call for our government which can no longer stay silent.

    “New Zealand has been a staunch ally of the US/Israel throughout the past 13 months when it should have been a staunch defender of international law.

    “Unbelievably, our government still refuses to call for an immediate, permanent ceasefire and while it has condemned every act of Palestinian resistance, it has refused to condemn any of the egregious Israeli war crimes which are the subject of the arrest warrants.”

    In response to the ICC decision, New Zealand should immediately end support for Israel to continue its war crimes such as:

    • Suspend all satellite launches by Rocket lab for BlackSky Technology, Capella Space, and HawkEye 360. These companies provide imaging data used by Israeli for its targeting of civilian infrastructure in Gaza and Lebanon.
    • Suspend and independently investigate the export of crystal oscillators from Rakon Industries which end up in bombs used for war crimes in Gaza and Lebanon, and
    • Impose sanctions against Israel — they are also essential and the ICC decision can be the trigger.

    “New Zealand needs to act as we did when the ICC issued arrest warrants against Russian leader Vladimir Putin for the invasion of Ukraine” said Minto.

    “New Zealand imposed immediate and wide-ranging sanctions against Russia and must follow through with Israel.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘Wanted’ for war crimes over Gaza: Israel’s Netanyahu, Gallant face ICC arrest warrants

    Democracy Now!

    NERMEEN SHAIKH: In The Hague, the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during Israel’s assault on Gaza.

    In a statement, the ICC said the Israeli leaders had, “intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity.”

    The ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, although Israel’s military claims it killed Deif in a July airstrike.

    The ICC arrest warrants come a week after a UN special committee found Israel’s actions in Gaza since October 2023 are, “consistent with genocide,” including using starvation as a weapon of war and recklessly inflicting civilian casualties.

    AMY GOODMAN: In related news, on Wednesday, the United States vetoed a Gaza ceasefire resolution at the UN Security Council for the fourth time, and the US Senate rejected a resolution brought by Senator Bernie Sanders that sought to block the sale of US tank rounds, bomb kits and other lethal weapons to Israel. Nineteen senators supported blocking the arms.

    For more on all of this, we’re joined by Akbar Shahid Ahmed, senior diplomatic correspondent for HuffPost. His latest piece is “Exclusive: White House Says Democrats Who Oppose Weapons to Israel Are Aiding Hamas.”

    Ahmed, thank you so much for being with us. As you write your book on the Biden administration in Gaza called Crossing the Red Line, clearly the ICC has ruled that today by issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

    Can you talk about the significance of this move?

    AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: Yeah, Amy. This is just an absolutely huge development, and it’s significant for a number of reasons. It’s significant because the ICC has come out and amplified and affirmed the allegations of crimes against humanity, of war crimes. This is one more international body.

    These are . . . international charges with a great deal of respect. This is a court that most of the world is a member of. And they’re coming out and saying, “Look, we think there are reasonable grounds to believe that these major international red lines have been crossed by the Israelis.”

    What’s really important to remember is that this isn’t just a decision about Israel. By extension, it fundamentally is a decision about the United States, which has been the ultimate enabler of Israel’s offensives in Gaza and Lebanon, which are under consideration by the ICC.

    And even in this ICC statement today, they point out that in the situations where Israel has addressed concerns over what it describes as starvation as a method of warfare — right? — depriving civilians, Palestinians, of food, water and medical equipment, Israel has really only done so in an extremely arbitrary and, what the ICC judges call, conditional way in response to the US. So, fundamentally, Amy, what we’re seeing is the ICC is saying yet again that Israel and the US, as its major enabler and backer, are in the dark and will continue to be in the dark for years to come.

    This kind of adds to a broader picture in which there are now ICC warrants for the sitting Israeli prime minister and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, who remains a significant politician in Israel. Simultaneously, there’s the genocide case at the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, which is ongoing and will be ongoing for years to come.

    And there’s the Geneva Conventions conference underway next year regarding kind of similar issues — right? — violations of international law, laws of war and the Israeli grave abuses that are alleged. So, the US and Israel will be kind of on trial on the international stage for years to come.


    ‘Wanted for war crimes in Gaza.’        Video: Democracy Now!

    NERMEEN SHAIKH: So, Akbar, would you say that this move is mostly a symbolic one? Because, as you pointed out, of course, most countries are members of the International Criminal Court, but in this instance, perhaps most importantly, neither Israel nor the US are.

    AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: Right, Nermeen. And that’s something that the ICC judges did get into today — right? — because Israel said, “Look, the International Criminal Court doesn’t have jurisdiction over us.” That said, the state of Palestine is a member of the court, and that’s why this becomes a relevant and interesting thing, because you’ve seen European nations recognise Palestine as a state. You’ve seen Palestine join the United Nations General Assembly over just last year.

    So, yes, while the US and Israel continue to reject international scrutiny by the ICC, by the ICJ, of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the occupied West Bank and Lebanon, there’s a growing international push to kind of challenge that, right?

    And I think you will see the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration assertively push back against the ICC. The Trump administration did actually target the ICC directly when President Trump was last in office, threatening to put sanctions on ICC officials. And we also know from reporting that the Israelis have spied on and threatened the ICC themselves, according to reporting by The Guardian. So, yes, there will be increased pressure.

    But I think we’re really in a place that no one thought we would be even a few months ago, right? I think even the prospect of the ICC prosecutor successfully getting these warrants issued, it was initially thought that would be quite quick. It’s taken a long time. The fact that judges were able to issue those warrants suggests that even though it’s an uphill battle to get this international scrutiny, there’s a real determination and clear will.

    And we’ve seen a lot of states turn around and say over 13 months, right? Since the October 7 attack by Hamas within Israel that did spark this current round of fighting, there have been calls to say, “We don’t want this to escalate,” right?

    The US’s allies, Western countries have said, “We want to resolve this. We don’t want you on trial. Can the US and Israel please change course?” And what you’ve seen is a defiance from Tel Aviv and from Washington to say, “Actually, no, we’re continuing these wars.”

    So, that does take it to a different forum to kind of change the policy.

    NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Akbar, could you also — while we’re looking at the way in which international organisations, multilateral ones, are responding to this, what about the latest vote at the Security Council and the fact that the US blocked it for the fourth time, a ceasefire vote?

    AKBAR SHAHID AHMED: It’s really striking at this point — right? — to see the Biden administration totally alone. And you see how this develops over the course of the war. Initially, the US was able to get Britain, even France, kind of abstaining, standing with them.

    And now, 13 months in, where conduct hasn’t changed, and you still have daily strikes that are killing dozens, sometimes over a hundred civilians, you have a mounting death toll of mostly women and children, the US is totally alone, where it’s shielding Israel on the world stage diplomatically.

    And this is really important to see in the context of the Biden administration as an outlier even among American presidents and administrations. When President Barack Obama was in office, after he was in the lame-duck period that Biden is in now, he actually did abstain at the UN Security Council and said, “You know what? Go ahead and pass a resolution that Israel doesn’t like,” because tacitly the US acknowledged there was a basis, there were credible grounds for that resolution, which in that instance was about Israeli settlement activity.

    Here, what you’re seeing from the Biden administration, even in their dying days — right? — two months to go, there’s an obstinacy, a defiance, and a real commitment to shielding Israel, even if they are totally alone against now their closest allies — Britain, France and everyone else on the Security Council.

    So, I think the context of that veto kind of presages whatever may come in the next two months in terms of the Biden administration allowing any UN scrutiny of the wars.

    AMY GOODMAN: Akbar, I want to play Palestine’s envoy to the United Nations, Majed Bamya, speaking yesterday.

    MAJED BAMYA: There is no right to mass killing of civilians. There is no right to starve an entire civilian population. There is no right to forcibly displace a people. And there is no right to annexation. This is what Israel is doing in Gaza. …

    Maybe for some, we have the wrong nationality, the wrong faith, the wrong skin color. But we are humans! And we should be treated as such. Is there a UN Charter for Israel that is different from the charter we all have? Tell us. Is there an international law for them, an international law for us? Do they have the right to kill, and the only right we have is to die?

    Republished under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States Licence.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s leading newspaper defends young MP’s Parliament ‘shining light’ haka

    Pacific Media Watch

    New Zealand’s leading daily newspaper has joined the debate about the haka that stunned Parliament and the nation last week, defending the youngest MP for her actions, saying she is a “product of her forebears” and “shining a light” on the new national conversation about the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi.

    That haka has been criticised by some conservative politicians and civic leaders as “appalling behaviour” and led to Te Pāti Māori’s 22-year-old Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke being “named” by the Speaker and suspended from the House for 24 hours.

    However, among many have rallied to her support across the nation, with The New Zealand Herald declaring in an editorial on Tuesday that her haka “shines the light on a new conversation growing louder daily and describing where many Māori are at politically”.

    In light of the haka performed in Parliament, The Herald said, it was “important to understand what was on show” 184 years after the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi by the British Crown and more than 40 Māori chiefs as the founding document for New Zealand.

    The haka protest came as thousands joined a massive nine-day Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti that marched the 1600km length of the country from north and south ending at Parliament in an impressive show of solidarity against the unpopular bill.

    “Culturally, haka is the ability to express thoughts and views in a way that provides clarity with the thoughts of those who deliver it. Haka can be delivered and invoked in many different ways and many different times,” said The Herald.

    “It can be delivered at the beginning of a kaupapa (cause) — like the All Blacks’ pre-match haka — or delivered near the end as a tangi when a tūpāpaku (body) is being taken to its final destination.”

    The newspaper said that when Maipi-Clarke broke into that haka in Parliament, it was her way of expressing her “absolute disgust and loathing of David Seymour’s Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill”.

    Unapologetically Māori
    “Toitū Te Tiriti, the kōhanga reo generation and unapologetically Māori whānau are intertwined. Their whakapapa is the same,” The Herald said.

    “Toitū Te Tiriti says Te Tiriti will endure no matter what. The first of the kōhanga reo generation – the babies brought up in kōhanga reo over 40 years ago, like Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi – and casting their leadership across te ao Māori.

    “They have been in the workforce for 20+ years, using te reo Māori and mātauranga Māori (Māori intelligence) as their north compass.

    “Maipi-Clarke is part of all three groups. She is a product of her forebears.

    “Maipi-Clarke looks at the world through a kaupapa Māori lens. The things which drive her are Māori-centric, first and foremost. That is who she is and what defines her. The new Māori Queen, Nga wai hono i te po, is of the same ilk.

    “Unapologetically Māori is a statement that serves as a declaration to the world about who Maipi-Clarke and those of her generation are, their truth and how to act from a holistic Māori world view.”

    ‘Their very identity threatened’
    The newspaper said Maipi-Clarke, her Te Pāti Māori colleagues and other politicians in the House “reacted when they felt their very identity was threatened”.

    “They acted the only way they believed was appropriate, with class and with mana.”

    The Herald said Maipi-Clarke, like many Māori and non-Māori, were angry with the progression of this bill.

    “She responded to it as she was taught by her predecessors and peers with a haka,” the paper said.

    “That’s the way Māori of the kōhanga reo generation were brought up to voice their concerns.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Why NZ is protesting over colonial-era treaty bill – a global perspective

    An overview for our international readers of Asia Pacific Report.

    BACKGROUNDER: By Sarah Shamim

    A fight for Māori indigenous rights drew more than 50,000 protesters to the New Zealand Parliament in the capital Wellington yesterday.

    A nine-day-long Hīkoi, or peaceful march — a Māori tradition — was undertaken in protest against a bill that seeks to “reinterpret” the country’s 184-year-old founding Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed between British imperial colonisers and the Indigenous Māori tangata whenua (people).

    Some had also been peacefully demonstrating outside the Parliament building for nine days before the protest concluded yesterday.

    On November 14, the controversial Treaty Principles Bill was introduced in Parliament for a preliminary first reading vote. Māori parliamentarians staged a haka (a traditional ceremonial dance) to disrupt the vote, temporarily halting parliamentary proceedings.

    So, what was the Treaty of Waitangi, what are the proposals for altering it, and why has it become a flashpoint for protests in New Zealand?

    Maori protest
    Thousands of marchers protesting government policies that affect the Māori cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge on day three of the nine-day journey to Wellington. Image: AJ

    Who are the Māori?
    The Māori people are the original residents of the two large main islands now known as New Zealand, having lived there for several centuries.

    The Māori came to the uninhabited islands of New Zealand from East Polynesia on canoe voyages betweemn 1200 and 1300. Over hundreds of years of isolation, they developed their own distinct culture and language. Māori people speak te reo Māori and have different tribes, or iwi, spread throughout the country.

    The two islands were originally called Aotearoa by the Māori. The name New Zealand was adopted by the colonisers who took control under the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840.

    While Dutch explorer Abel Tasman was the first European to “discover” New Zealand in 1642, calling it Staten Land, three years later Dutch cartographers renamed the land Nova Zeelandia after the Dutch province of Zeeland.

    British explorer James Cook later anglicised the name to New Zealand.

    New Zealand became a “dominion” under the British crown in 1907 after being a colony.

    It gained full independence from Britain in 1947 when it adopted the Statute of Westminster.

    However, for a century the Māori people had suffered mass killings, land grabs and cultural erasure at the hands of colonial settlers.

    There are currently 978,246 Māori in New Zealand, constituting around 19 percent of the country’s population of 5.3 million. They are partially represented by Te Pāti Māori — the Māori Party — which currently holds six of the 123 seats in Parliament.

    INTERACTIVE - New Zealand Indigenous Maori-1732000986
    New Zaland Māori demographics. Graphic: AJLabs/Al Jazeera/CC

    What was the Treaty of Waitangi?
    On February 6, 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi, also called Te Tiriti o Waitangi or just Te Tiriti in te reo, was signed between the British Crown and around 500 Māori chiefs, or rangatira. The treaty was the founding document of New Zealand and officially made New Zealand a British colony.

    While the treaty was presented as a measure to resolve differences between the Māori and the British, the English and te reo versions of the treaty actually feature some stark differences.

    The te reo Māori version guarantees “rangatiratanga” to the Māori chiefs. This translates to “self-determination” and guarantees the Māori people the right to govern themselves.

    However, the English translation says that the Maori chiefs “cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty”, making no mention of self-rule for the Maori.

    The English translation does guarantee the Māori “full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries”.

    “The English draft talks about the British settlers having full authority and control over Māori in the whole country,” Kassie Hartendorp, a Māori community organiser and director at community campaigning organisation ActionStation Aotearoa, told Al Jazeera.

    Hartendorp explained that the te reo version includes the term “kawanatanga”, which in historical and linguistic context “gives British settlers the opportunity to set up their own government structure to govern their own people but they would not limit the sovereignty of Indigenous people”.

    “We never ceded sovereignty, we never handed it over. We gave a generous invitation to new settlers to create their own government because they were unruly and lawless at the time,” said Hartendorp.

    In the decades after 1840, however, 90 percent of Māori land was taken by the British Crown. Both versions of the treaty have been repeatedly breached and Māori people have continued to suffer injustice in New Zealand even after independence.

    In 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal was established as a permanent body to adjudicate treaty matters. The tribunal attempts to remedy treaty breaches and navigate differences between the treaty’s two texts.

    Over time, billions of dollars have been negotiated in settlements over breaches of the treaty, particularly relating to the widespread seizure of Māori land.

    However, other injustices have also occurred. Between 1950 and 2019, about 200,000 children, young people and vulnerable adults were subjected to physical and sexual abuse in state and church care, and a commission found Māori children were more vulnerable to the abuse than others.

    On November 12 this year, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon issued an apology to these victims, but it was criticised by Māori survivors for being inadequate. One criticism was that the apology did not take the treaty into account.

    While the treaty’s principles are not set in stone and are flexible, it is a significant historical document that upholds Māori rights.

    Generation Kohanga Reo
    Generation Kohanga Reo . . . making a difference at the Hīkoi. Image: David Robie/APR

    What does the Treaty Principles Bill propose?
    The Treaty Principles Bill was introduced by Member of Parliament David Seymour, leader of the libertarian ACT Party, a minor partner in New Zealand’s rightwing coalition government. Seymour himself is of Māori heritage.

    The party launched a public information campaign about the bill on February 7 this year.

    The ACT Party asserts that the treaty has been misinterpreted over the decades and that this has led to the formation of a dual system for New Zealanders, where Māori and pākehā (white) New Zealanders have different political and legal rights. Seymour says that misinterpretations of the treaty’s meaning have effectively given Māori people special treatment.

    The bill calls for an end to “division by race”.

    Seymour said that the principle of “ethnic quotas in public institutions”, for example, is contrary to the principle of equality.

    The bill seeks to set specific definitions of the treaty’s principles, which are currently flexible and open to interpretation. These principles would then apply to all New Zealanders equally, whether they are Māori or not.

    According to Together for Te Tiriti, an initiative led by ActionStation Aotearoa, the bill will allow the New Zealand government to govern all New Zealanders and consider all New Zealanders equal under the law.

    Activists say this will effectively disadvantage indigenous Māori people because they have been historically oppressed.

    Many, including the Waitangi Tribunal, say this will lead to the erosion of Māori rights. A statement by ActionStation Aotearoa says that the bill’s principles “do not at all reflect the meaning” of the Treaty of Waitangi.

    Why is the bill so controversial?
    The bill is strongly opposed by political parties in New Zealand on both the left and the right, and Maori people have criticised it on the basis that it undermines the treaty and its interpretation.

    Gideon Porter, a Maori journalist from New Zealand, told Al Jazeera that most Maori, as well as historians and legal experts, agree that the bill is an “attempt to redefine decades of exhaustive research and negotiated understandings of what constitute ‘principles’ of the treaty”.

    Porter added that those critical of the bill believe “the ACT Party within this coalition government is taking upon itself to try and engineer things so that Parliament gets to act as judge, jury and executioner”.

    In the eyes of most Maori, he said, the ACT Party is “simply hiding its racism behind a facade of ‘we are all New Zealanders with equal rights’ mantra”.

    The Waitangi Tribunal released a report on August 16 saying that it found the bill “breached the Treaty principles of partnership and reciprocity, active protection, good government, equity, redress, and the … guarantee of rangatiratanga”.

    Another report by the tribunal seen by The Guardian newspaper said: “If this bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty … in modern times.”

    Treaty Principles Bill . . . submissions
    Treaty Principles Bill . . . submissions. Image: APR screenshot

    What process must the bill go through now?
    For a bill to become law in New Zealand, it must go through three rounds in Parliament: first when it is introduced, then when MPs suggest amendments and finally, when they vote on the amended bill. Since the total number of MPs is 123, at least 62 votes are needed for a bill to pass, David MacDonald, a political science professor at the University of Guelph in Canada, told Al Jazeera.

    Besides the six Māori Party seats, the New Zealand Parliament comprises 34 seats held by the Labour Party; 14 seats held by the Green Party of Aotearoa; 49 seats held by the National Party; 11 seats held by the ACT Party; and eight seats held by the New Zealand First Party.

    “The National Party leaders including the PM and other cabinet ministers and the leaders of the other coalition party [New Zealand] First have all said they won’t support the bill beyond the committee stage. It is highly unlikely that the bill will receive support from any party other than ACT,” MacDonald said.

    When the bill was heard for its first round in Parliament last week, Māori party lawmaker Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke tore up her copy of the legislation and led the haka.

    Is the bill likely to pass?
    The chances of the bill becoming law are “zero”, Porter said.

    He said the ACT’s coalition partners had “adamantly promised” to vote down the bill in the next stage. Additionally, all the opposition parties will also vote against it.

    “They only agreed to allow it to go this far as part of their ‘coalition agreement’ so they could govern,” Porter said.

    New Zealand’s current coalition government was formed in November 2023 after an election that took place a month earlier. It comprises the National Party, ACT and New Zealand First.

    While rightwing parties have not given a specific reason why they will oppose the bill, Hartendorp said New Zealand First and the New Zealand National Party would likely vote in line with public opinion, which largely opposes it.

    Why are people protesting if the bill is doomed to fail?
    The protests are not against the bill alone.

    “This latest march is a protest against many coalition government anti-Māori initiatives,” Porter said.

    Many believe that the conservative coalition government, which took office in November 2023, has taken measures to remove “race-based politics”. The Māori people are not happy with this and believe that it will undermine their rights.

    These measures include removing a law that gave the Maori a say in environmental matters. The government also abolished the Maori Health Authority in February this year.

    Despite the bill being highly likely to fail, many believe that just by allowing the bill to be tabled in Parliament, the coalition government has ignited dangerous social division.

    For example, former conservative Prime Minister Jenny Shipley has said that just putting forth the bill is sowing division in New Zealand, and she warned of potential “civil war”.

    Sarah Shamim is a freelance writer and assistant producer at Al Jazeera Media Network, where this article was first published.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Bill would ‘render the treaty worthless’ – world reacts to national Hīkoi

    RNZ News

    International media coverage of Aotearoa New Zealand’s national Hīkoi to Parliament has largely focused on the historic size of the turnout in Wellington yesterday and the wider contention between Māori and the Crown.

    Some, including The New York Times, have also pointed out the recent swing right with the election of the coalition government as part of the reason for the unrest.

    The Times article said New Zealand had veered “sharply right”, likening it to Donald Trump’s re-election.

    “New Zealand bears little resemblance to the country recently led by Jacinda Ardern, whose brand of compassionate, progressive politics made her a global symbol of anti-Trump liberalism.”

    The challenging of the rights of Māori was “driving a wedge into New Zealand society”, the article said.

    Coverage in The Guardian explained that the Treaty Principles Bill was unlikely to pass.

    “However, it has prompted widespread anger among the public, academics, lawyers and Māori rights groups who believe it is creating division, undermining the treaty, and damaging the relationship between Māori and ruling authorities,” it said.

    ‘Critical moment’
    Turkey’s public broadcaster TRT World said New Zealand “faces a critical moment in its journey toward reconciling with its Indigenous population”.

    While Al Jazeera agreed it was “a contentious bill redefining the country’s founding agreement between the British and the Indigenous Māori people”.

    The Washington Post pointed out that the “bill is deeply unpopular, even among members of the ruling conservative coalition”.

    “While the bill would not rewrite the treaty itself, it would essentially extend it equally to all New Zealanders, which critics say would effectively render the treaty worthless,” the article said.

    The Hīkoi, and particularly the culmination of more than 42,000 people at Parliament, was covered in most of the mainstream international media outlets including Britain’s BBC and CNN in the United States, as well as wire agencies, including AFP, AP and Reuters.

    Across the Ditch, the ABC headline called it a “flashpoint” on race relations. While the article went on to say it was “a critical moment in the fraught 180-year-old conversation about how New Zealand should honour the promises made to First Nations people when the country was colonised”.

    Most of the articles also linked back to Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke’s haka in Parliament which also garnered significant international attention.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • ‘What’s good for Māori is good for everyone’ – Hīkoi ends with peaceful protest

    By Ashleigh McCaull, RNZ News journalist

    Aotearoa New Zealand’s capital Wellington Pōneke turned into a sea of black, white and red today, as more than 42,000 people supporting te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti overflowed Parliament’s lawn and onto the streets.

    Supporters then headed to Waitangi Park, where a post-hīkoi concert took place.

    Thousands of supporters already at Parliament greeted the hīkoi when it entered the gates, with haka and the sound of the pūtātara (Māori shell trumpet) ringing out across the lawn.


    42,000 people at Parliament during Hīkoi.   Video: RNZ News

    Among the dignitaries towards the front of the hīkoi was Māori Queen Nga wai hono i te po, who stood alongside Hone Harawira, Tuku Morgan and Te Pati Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke.

    Fireworks were let off several times at Parliament.

    One kuia told RNZ she was happy the Hīkoi stayed peaceful and did not end up like the anti-mandate protest at Parliament more than two years ago.

    Horomona Horo travelled from Waikato in opposition to the Treaty Principles Bill.

    “The purpose of it is to stand up against the atrocities of not just this government, but governments of the past as well, and the discrepancies that have happened over the years.”

    When asked what he thought of Treaty Principles Bill architect David Seymour’s short appearance on the forecourt, Horo said the day was not about him, but more about everyone coming together and uniting.

    The national hīkoi converges at Parliament Grounds on 19 November 2024.
    The national Hīkoi converges at Parliament Grounds. Image: Reece Baker/RNZ

    “At the end of the day, if you speak for your people, you need to show up. And not show up to blink an eye or two, but to actually show up in good times and bad times and in celebration as well as in times like today, where he knows he’s done wrong and he knows the things that need to happen.

    “He cannot turn his words back on what he’s already said,” Horo said.

    After everything wrapped up at Parliament, traffic came to a standstill as a haka broke out on on the intersection of Bunny Street and Featherston Street.

    The hikoi against the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill reaches Parliament.
    The Hikoi against the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill reaches Parliament. Image: VNP/Phil Smith

    ‘Kill the Bill!’
    Seymour and his caucus were escorted by several police officers when they briefly ventured out to Parliament’s forecourt, and were greeted by the crowd chanting “kill the Bill”.

    The ACT Party leader said yesterday that he would assess the mood of the crowd first before deciding whether or not to engage with them.

    Te Pati Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi was speaking to the crowd at the time Seymour came out and encouraged them to chant “kill the Bill” to give a clear message for the ACT leader.

    After five minutes, Seymour turned and headed back inside the building.

    The crowd chants”kill the Bill”.         Video: RNZ News

     

    Later this afternoon, the official ACT instagram page posted a video with Seymour saying this was a speech he had hoped to deliver to Hīkoi supporters who had marched from all across the motu.

    “They’d see that I’m actually a New Zealander like them — in fact, one who is whakapapa Māori, who would like to see a better world with more homes being built, more infrastructure, better jobs, better health and education.

    “That would be a constructive discussion to have, but sadly not one that is possible when you see New Zealand as a compact of two collectives defined by ancestry.

    “It may be that we find New Zealand is not mature enough to have this discussion, I suspect that’s wrong,” Seymour said.

    In response to the crowd chanting “kill the Bill”, he said he encouraged Hīkoi supporters to read the Bill.

    Seymour later told RNZ Checkpoint that the Hīkoi was “not representative” of New Zealand, and only 0.2 percent of Māori were at the Parliament protest.

    Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was asked before Question Time whether he would prefer the bill to be disposed of before Waitangi Day commemorations in Feburary.

    “[The bill] is not something I like or support, but we have come to a compromise.

    “Now, it’s in the hands of Parliament, it’s now in the hands of the select committee, they work through the timing from here on through, as they should.”

    Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters called the Hīkoi a “waste of time” as the Treaty Principles Bill was “dead on arrival”.

    The Bill was fatally flawed and never going to work, he said, and Hīkoi attendees should know that.

    ‘I’m not worried about sales’
    While the Hīkoi made its way to Parliament, business owners and staff watched and filmed from their doorways as the masses went past.

    The hīkoi protesting against the Treaty Principles Bill in Wellington on 19 November 2024.
    The Hīkoi protesting against the Treaty Principles Bill in Wellington on 19 November 2024. Image: RNZ/Reece Baker

    Every store RNZ visited at the time the Hīkoi was passing through was empty, but several business owners on Willis Street said they did not mind the disruption and supported the cause.

    Capricorn Spirit owner Susan Cameron said the Hīkoi was for a good cause.

    “I’m not worried about sales,” she said. “We’ve got to tell Parliament as a whole country that we do not stand for this.”

    To those on the Hīkoi, she said: “Good on you. Well done. I wish I could be with you, but at this moment I can’t, I need to be here, but I support everything you’re standing for here.”

    Meanwhile, Dixon Street coffee shop Swimsuit had to call in back-up as customer numbers were similar to the store’s busiest Saturdays.

    Barista Sarah Green said five staff were on deck for 320 orders — many of which were for multiple coffees.

    Flags fly high in Waitangi Park
    The meeting point for the hīkoi this morning was at Waitangi Park, which was dominated by either tino rangatiratanga flags, toitu te tiriti flags or the flag for the United Tribes.

    RNZ spoke to a few people on their thoughts about Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.

    “I think he’s a very arrogant man, at the end of the day he says he’s got Māori in him, he still uses white rules to try and rule the rest of the country. Well, it ain’t his land, it belongs to us. We were the first ones here so we own it. And our tipuna, they were good people but now he’s trying to do this to us and it’s not fair,” said Kathleen Mihaere.

    “I don’t like him, okay? He needs to wake up and realise this is our whenua, we own this. You fellas are visitors and if you are one of us, be one of us,” said Sheena Tonihi.

    “What’s good for Māori is good for everyone, we come here as peace, we love everyone no matter who you are, where you come from. But yeah, what’s good for Māori is good for everyone,” said Henare Karepe.


    Thoughts on David Seymour voxies.     Video: RNZ News

     

    Before the hīkoi got underway, singer Stan Walker also went out and sang for the crowd.

    The hīkoi later returned to the park from Parliament for an evening concert.

    Marching before dawn
    More than 2000 people set off from the Hutt Valley at about 4am this morning and met with another group coming from Porirua on Wellington’s waterfront before they marched to Parliament.

    Some participants arriving on horses.
    Some Hīkoi participants arriving on horseback. Image: RNZ/Pokere Paewai

    When the hīkoi reached a third of the way through the 14km journey to Wellington train station, it was met with lots of toots from passing traffic, mostly trucks at that time of the morning.

    People on a passing train were videoing the hīkoi as it went by.

    There were babies and elderly and hundreds of tino rangatiratanga flags flying.

    Damian from Naenae said today’s hīkoi was hugely significant.

    He said even though the Treaty Principles Bill was unlikely to make it past the second reading, the fact it was before Parliament at all was an injustice, and people felt that in their wairua.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    Hikoi in welly
    Hīkoi participants. Image: RNZ/Phil Pennington

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi day 9: 35,000 join as Treaty Principles Bill protest reaches Parliament

    RNZ News

    More than 35,000 people today gathered as Aotearoa New Zealand’s Hīkoi mō te Tiriti overflowed from Parliament’s grounds and onto nearby streets in the capital Wellington Pōneke.

    Eru Kapa-Kingi told the crowd “Māori nation has been born” today and that “Te Tiriti is forever”.

    ACT leader David Seymour was met with chants of “Kill the bill, kill the bill” when he walked out of the Beehive for a brief appearance at Parliament’s forecourt, before waving to the crowd and returning into the building.


    The Hikoi at Parliament today. Video: RNZ News

    The Treaty Principles Bill architect, Seymour, said he supported the right to protest, but thought participants were misguided and had a range of different grievances.

    Interviewed earlier before Question Time, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said it was up to Parliament’s justice committee to decide whether the select committee process on the Treaty Principles Bill should be shortened.

    The select committee will receive public submissions until January 7, and intends to complete hearings by the end of February.

    Waitangi Day uncertainty
    It means the Prime Minister will head to Waitangi while submissions on the bill are still happening.

    Luxon was asked whether he would prefer if the bill was disposed of before Waitangi Day commemorations on February 6

    “It’ll be what it will be.

    “Let’s be clear — there is a strong depth of emotion on all sides of this debate.

    “Yes, [the bill] is not something I like or support, but we have come to a compromise.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hikoī day 8: Te Pāti Māori co-leader speaks of ‘sense of betrayal’ over bill

    RNZ News

    ACT leader David Seymour has spoken out on Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke’s haka in Parliament as a Hīkoi against his controversial Treaty Principles Bill converges on Wellington.

    The Te Pāti Māori MP was suspended for 24 hours and “named” for leading the haka during the first reading of the bill last Thursday.

    Seymour told reporters the haka “was designed to get in other people’s faces”, to stop the people who represent New Zealanders from having their say, particularly because those doing it left their seats.

    The action was a serious matter, and if a haka was allowed one time, it left the door open for other disruptions in Parliament at other times.

    Labour’s vote against the decision to suspend Maipi-Clarke from the House was an indication it thought such behaviour was appropriate.

    People should be held accountable for their actions, Seymour added.

    Asked by reporters if Seymour should speak to the Hīkoi, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said his voice had already been heard, and described Māori feeling “a sense of betrayal”.

    The bill should never have come into the House, she said.

    A ferry carrying protesters from the South Island is now on its way across the Cook Strait as final preparations are made in the capital for tomorrow’s gathering at the Beehive.

    In Wellington, commuters are being warned to allow extra time for travel, and add one or even two hours to their trips to work on Tuesday even as extra buses and train carriages are put on.

    Māori Queen to join Hīkoi
    A spokesperson for the Kiingitanga movement said although this was a period of mourning in the wake of the death of her late father, the Māori Queen would be joining the Hīkoi in Wellington.

    Te Arikinui Kuini Nga Wai Hono i te Po confirmed late last night she planned to be at Parliament tomorrow.

    Speaking to RNZ’s Midday Report, spokesperson Ngira Simmonds said while it was uncommon for a Māori monarch to break the period of mourning, Kuini Nga Wai Hono i te Po would be there to advocate for more unity between Māori and the Crown.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi day 8: Significant disruption expected when thousands converge on capital

    RNZ News

    New Zealand’s hīkoi against the Treaty Principles Bill could be one of the largest rallies that the capital has seen for years, Wellington City Council says.

    The Hīkoi mō te Tiriti will arrive in Wellington tomorrow, and locals are being warned to expect disruption and plan ahead.

    Yesterday, about 5000 people filled the square in Palmerston North before the convoy headed south, stopping for a rally in Levin.

    Thousands of supporters were then welcomed at Takapūwāhia Marae, in Porirua, north of Wellington.

    They will have a rest day in Porirua today before gathering at Wellington’s Waitangi Park on tomorrow morning, and converging on Parliament.

    “There is likely to be some disruption to roads and highways,” the council said in a statement.

    ‘Plan ahead’ call
    “Please plan ahead if travelling by road or rail on Tuesday, November 19, as delays are possible.”

    The Hīkoi will start at 6am, travelling from Porirua to Waitangi Park, where it will arrive at 9am.

    It will then depart the park at 10am, travelling along the Golden Mile to Parliament, where it will arrive at midday.

    The Hīkoi will return to Waitangi Park at 4pm for a concert, karakia, and farewell.

    State Highways 1 and 2 busier than normal.

    Police said no significant issues had been reported as a result of the Hīkoi.

    A traffic management plan would be in place for its arrival into Wellington, with heavier than usual traffic anticipated, particularly in the Hutt Valley early Tuesday morning, and on SH2 between Lower Hutt and Wellington city.

    Anyone living or working in the city should plan accordingly, Wellington District Commander Superintendent Corrie Parnell said.

    Police ‘working with Hikoī’
    “Police have been working closely with iwi and Hīkoi organisers, and our engagement has been positive.

    “The event as it has moved down the country has been conducted peacefully, and we have every reason to believe this will continue.

    “In saying that, disruption is expected through the city centre as the hīkoi makes its way from Waitangi Park to Parliament.

    “We’ve planned ahead with NZTA, Wellington City Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council, local schools, retailers and other stakeholders to mitigate this as best possible, but Wellingtonians should be prepared for Tuesday to look a little different.”

    Protesters in Dannevirke during day 6 of Hīkoi mō te Tiriti.
    Riders on horseback have joined the Hīkoi along the route. Image: RNZ/Pokere Paewai

    Wellington Station bus hub will be closed, with buses diverted to nearby locations.

    Metlink has also added extra capacity to trains outside of peak times (9am-3pm).

    Police said parking was expected to be extremely difficult on Tuesday, especially around the bus hub, Lambton Quay and Parliament grounds.

    Wellingtonians were being to exercise patience, particularly on busy roads, Parnell said.

    “We ask you to allow more time than normal to get where you are going. Plan ahead by looking at how road closures and public transport changes might affect you, and expect that there will be delays at some point throughout the day.”

    PM: ‘We’ll wait and see’
    Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he was playing his approach to the Hīkoi “by ear”.

    He has been at his first APEC meeting in Peru, but will arrive back in New Zealand today.

    He said he was open to speaking with members of the Hīkoi on Tuesday, but no plans had been made as yet.

    “We haven’t made a decision. We’ll wait and see, but I’m very open to meeting, in some form or another.

    “It’s obviously building as it walks through the country and gets to Wellington, and we’ll just wait and see and take it as it comes.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Survey warning on Papua ‘box ticking’ mega estates project goes unheeded

    By Stephen Wright for Radio Free Asia

    Indonesia’s plan to convert over 2 million ha of conservation and indigenous lands into agriculture will cause long-term damage to the environment, create conflict and add to greenhouse gas emissions, according to a feasibility study document for the Papua region mega-project.

    The 96-page presentation reviewed by Radio Free Asia was drawn up by Sucofindo, the Indonesian government’s inspection and land surveying company.

    Dated July 4, it analyses the risks and benefits of the sugar cane and rice estate in Merauke regency on Indonesia’s border with Papua New Guinea and outlines a feasibility study that was to have been completed by mid-August.

    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024
    COP29 BAKU, 11-22 November 2024

    Though replete with warnings that “comprehensive” environmental impact assessments should take place before any land is cleared, the feasibility process appears to have been a box-ticking exercise. Sucofindo did not respond to questions from RFA, a news service affiliated with BenarNews, about the document.

    Even before the study was completed, then-President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo participated in a ceremony in Merauke on July 23 that marked the first sugar cane planting on land cleared of forest for the food estate, the government said in a statement.

    Jokowi’s decade-long presidency ended last month.

    Excavators destroy villages
    In late July, dozens of excavators shipped by boat were unloaded in the Ilyawab district of Merauke where they destroyed villages and cleared forests and wetlands for rice fields, according to a report by civil society organisation Pusaka

    Hipolitus Wangge, an Indonesian politics researcher at Australian National University, told RFA the feasibility study document does not provide new information about the agricultural plans.

    But it makes it clear, he said, that in government there is “no specific response on how the state deals with indigenous concerns” and their consequences.

    The plan to convert as much as 2.3 million ha of forest, wetland and savannah into rice farms, sugarcane plantations and related infrastructure in the conflict-prone Papua region is part of the government’s ambitions to achieve food and energy self-sufficiency.

    Previous efforts in the nation of 270 million people have fallen short of expectations.

    Echoing government and military statements, Sucofindo said increasingly extreme climate change and the risk of international conflict are reasons why Indonesia should reduce reliance on food imports.

    Taken together, the sugarcane and rice projects represent at least a fifth of a 10,000 square km lowland area known as the TransFly that spans Indonesia and Papua New Guinea and which conservationists say is an already under-threat conservation treasure.

    Military leading role
    Indonesia’s military has a leading role in the 1.9 million ha rice plan while the government has courted investors for the sugar cane and related bioethanol projects.

    The likelihood of conflict with indigenous Papuans or of significant and long-term environmental damage applies in about 80 percent of the area targeted for development, according to Sucofindo’s analysis.

    The project’s “issues and challenges,” Sucofindo said, include “deforestation and biodiversity loss, destruction of flora and fauna habitats and loss of species”.

    It warns of long-term land degradation and erosion as well as water pollution and reduced water availability during the dry season caused by deforestation.

    Sucofindo said indigenous communities in Merauke rely on forests for livelihoods and land conversion will threaten their cultural survival. It repeatedly warns of the risk of conflict, which it says could stem from evictions and relocation.

    “Evictions have the potential to destabilize social and economic conditions,” Sucofindo said in its presentation.

    If the entire area planned for development is cleared, it would add about 392 million tons of carbon to the atmosphere in net terms, according to Sucofindo.

    That is about equal to half of the additional carbon emitted by Indonesia’s fire catastrophe in 2015 when hundreds of thousands of acres of peatlands drained for pulpwood and oil palm plantations burned for months.

    Then-President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo participates in a sugar-cane planting ceremony in Merauke
    Then-President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo participates in a sugar-cane planting ceremony in the Merauke regency of South Papua province in July. Image: Indonesian presidential office handout/Muchlis Jr

    Indonesia’s contribution to emissions that raise the average global temperature is significantly worsened by a combination of peatland fires and deforestation. Carbon stored in its globally important tropical forests is released when cut down for palm oil, pulpwood and other plantations.

    In a speech last week to the annual United Nations climate conference COP29, Indonesia’s climate envoy, a brother of recently inaugurated president Prabowo Subianto, said the new administration has a long-term goal to restore forests to 31.3 million acres severely degraded by fires in 2015 and earlier massive burnings in the 1980s and 1990s.

    Indonesia’s government has made the same promise in previous years including in its official progress report on its national contribution to achieving the Paris Agreement goal of keeping the rise in average global temperature to below 2 degrees Celsius.

    “President Prabowo has approved in principle a program of massive reforestation to these 12.7 million hectares in a biodiverse manner,” envoy Hashim Djojohadikusumo said during the livestreamed speech from Baku, Azerbaijan.

    “We will soon embark on this programme.”

    Prabowo’s government has announced plans to encourage outsiders to migrate to Merauke and other parts of Indonesia’s easternmost region, state media reported this month.

    Critics said such large-scale movements of people would further marginalise indigenous Papuans in their own lands and exacerbate conflict that has simmered since Indonesia took control of the region in the late 1960s.

    Republished from BenarNews with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Treaty Principles Bill ‘inviting civil war’, says former PM Shipley

    RNZ News

    A former New Zealand prime minister, Dame Jenny Shipley, has warned the ACT Party is “inviting civil war” with its attempt to define the principles of the 1840 Te Tiriti o Waitangi in law.

    The party’s controversial Treaty Principles Bill passed its first reading in Parliament on Thursday, voted for by ruling coalition members ACT, New Zealand First and National.

    National has said its MPs will vote against it at the second reading, after only backing it through the first as part of the coalition agreement with ACT.

    Voting on the bill was interrupted when Te Pāti Māori’s Hauraki Waikato MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke tore up a copy of the bill and launched into a haka, inspiring other opposition MPs and members of the public gallery to join in.

    Dame Jenny, who led the National Party from 1997 until 2001 and was prime minister for two of those years, threw her support behind Maipi-Clarke.

    “The Treaty, when it’s come under pressure from either side, our voices have been raised,” she told RNZ’s Saturday Morning.

    “I was young enough to remember Bastion Point, and look, the Treaty has helped us navigate. When people have had to raise their voice, it’s brought us back to what it’s been — an enduring relationship where people then try to find their way forward.

    “And I thought the voices of this week were completely and utterly appropriate, and whether they breach standing orders, I’ll put that aside.

    “The voice of Māori, that reminds us that this was an agreement, a contract — and you do not rip up a contract and then just say, ‘Well, I’m happy to rewrite it on my terms, but you don’t count.’

    Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipa-Clarke led a haka in Parliament after the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill
    Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipa-Clarke led a haka in Parliament and tore up a copy of the Treaty Principles Bill at the first reading in Parliament on Thursday . . . . a haka is traditionally used as an indigenous show of challenge, support or sorrow. Image: RNZ/Samuel Rillstone

    “I would raise my voice. I’m proud that the National Party has said they will not be supporting this, because you cannot speak out of both sides of your mouth.

    “And I think any voice that’s raised, and there are many people — pākeha and Māori who are not necessarily on this hikoi — who believe that a relationship is something you keep working at. You don’t just throw it in the bin and then try and rewrite it as it suits you.”

    Her comments come after Prime Minister Christopher Luxon called the bill “simplistic” and “unhelpful”, and former Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson — who negotiated more settlements than any other — said letting it pass its first reading would do “great damage” to National’s relationship with Māori.


    The Treaty Principles Bill reading vote.    Video: RNZ News

    Dame Jenny said past attempts to codify Treaty principles in law had failed.

    “While there have been principles leaked into individual statutes, we have never attempted to — in a formal sense — put principles in or over top of the Treaty as a collective. And I caution New Zealand — the minute you put the Treaty into a political framework in its totality, you are inviting civil war.

    “I would fight against it. Māori have every reason to fight against it.

    “This is a relationship we committed to where we would try and find a way to govern forward. We would respect each other’s land and interests rights, and we would try and be citizens together — and actually, we are making outstanding progress, and this sort of malicious, politically motivated, fundraising-motivated attempt to politicise the Treaty in a new way should raise people’s voices, because it is not in New Zealand’s immediate interest.

    “And you people should be careful what they wish for. If people polarise, we will finish up in a dangerous position. The Treaty is a gift to us to invite us to work together. And look, we’ve been highly successful in doing that, despite the odd ruction on the way.”

    She said New Zealand could be proud of the redress it had made to Māori, “where we accepted we had just made a terrible mess on stolen land and misused the undertakings of the Treaty, and we as a people have tried to put that right”.

    “I just despise people who want to use a treasure — which is what the Treaty is to me — and use it as a political tool that drives people to the left or the right, as opposed to inform us from our history and let it deliver a future that is actually who we are as New Zealanders . . .  I condemn David Seymour for his using this, asking the public for money to fuel a campaign that I think really is going to divide New Zealand in a way that I haven’t lived through in my adult life. There’s been flashpoints, but I view this incredibly seriously.”

    ‘Equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights’
    In response, David Seymour said the bill actually sought to “solve” the problem of “treating New Zealanders based on their ethnicity”.

    “Te Pāti Māori acted in complete disregard for the democratic system of which they are a part during the first reading of the bill, causing disruption, and leading to suspension of the House.

    “The Treaty Principles Bill commits to protecting the rights of everyone, including Māori, and upholding Treaty settlements. It commits to give equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights to every single New Zealander.

    “The challenge for people who oppose this bill is to explain why they are so opposed to those basic principles.”

    On Thursday, following the passing of the bill’s first reading, he said he was looking forward to seeing what New Zealanders had to say about it during the six-month select committee process.

    “The select committee process will finally democratise the debate over the Treaty which has until this point been dominated by a small number of judges, senior public servants, academics, and politicians.

    “Parliament introduced the concept of the Treaty principles into law in 1975 but did not define them. As a result, the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have been able to develop principles that have been used to justify actions that are contrary to the principle of equal rights. Those actions include co-governance in the delivery of public services, ethnic quotas in public institutions, and consultation based on background.

    “The principles of the Treaty are not going away. Either Parliament can define them, or the courts will continue to meddle in this area of critical political and constitutional importance.

    “The purpose of the Treaty Principles Bill is for Parliament to define the principles of the Treaty, provide certainty and clarity, and promote a national conversation about their place in our constitutional arrangements.”

    He said the bill in no way would alter or amend the Treaty itself.

    “I believe all New Zealanders deserve tino rangatiratanga — the right to self-determination. That all human beings are alike in dignity. The Treaty Principles Bill would give all New Zealanders equality before the law, so that we can go forward as one people with one set of rights.”

    The Hīkoi today was in Hastings, on its way to Wellington, where it is expected to arrive on Monday.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Treaty Principles Bill haka highlights tensions between Māori tikanga and rules of Parliament

    By Lillian Hanly, RNZ News political reporter, Craig McCulloch, RNZ deputy political editor, and Te Manu Korihi

    Te Pāti Māori’s extraordinary display of protest — interrupting the first vote on the Treaty Principles Bill — has highlighted the tension in Aotearoa New Zealand between Māori tikanga, or customs, and the rules of Parliament.

    When called on to cast Te Pāti Māori’s vote, its MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke instead launched into a haka, ripping a copy of the legislation in half.

    She was joined by other opposition MPs and onlookers, prompting Speaker Gerry Brownlee to temporarily suspend Parliament and clear out the public gallery.

    Brownlee subsequently censured Maipi-Clarke, describing her conduct as “appallingly disrespectful” and “grossly disorderly”.

    Maipi-Clarke was named and suspended, barring her from voting or entering the debating chamber for a 24-hour period. She also had her pay docked.


    Te Pāti Māori about to record their vote.   Video: RNZ/Parliament
    ‘Ka mate, ka mate’ – when is it appropriate to perform haka?

    The Ngāti Toa haka performed in Parliament was the well-known “Ka mate, Ka mate,” which tells the story of chief Te Rauparaha who was being chased by enemies and sought shelter where he hid. Once his enemies left he came out into the light.

    Ngāti Toa chief executive and rangatira Helmut Modlik told RNZ the haka was relevant to the debate. He said the bill had put Māori self-determination at risk – “ka mate, ka mate” – and Māori were reclaiming that – “ka ora, ka ora”.

    Haka was not governed by rules or regulation, Modlik said. It could be used as a show of challenge, support or sorrow.

    “In the modern setting, all of these possibilities are there for the use of haka, but as an expression of cultural preferences, cultural power, world view, ideas, sounds, language – it’s rather compelling.”

    Modlik acknowledged that Parliament operated according to its own conventions but said the “House and its rules only exist because our chiefs said it could be here”.

    “If you’re going to negate . . .  the constitutional and logical basis for your House being here . . . with your legislation, then that negates your right to claim it as your own to operate as you choose.”

    He argued critics were being too sensitive, akin to “complaining about the grammar being used as people are crying that the house is on fire”.

    “The firemen are complaining that they weren’t orderly enough,” Modlik said. “They didn’t use the right words.”

    Robust response expected
    Modlik said Seymour should expect a robust response to his own passionate performance and theatre: “That’s the Pandora’s Box he’s opening”.

    Following the party’s protest yesterday, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi told reporters “everyone should be proud to see [the haka] in its true context.”

    “We love it when the All Blacks do it, but what about when the ‘blackies’ do it?” he said.

    Today, speaking to those gathered for the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in Rotorua, Waititi said the party used “every tool available to us to use in the debates in that House”.

    “One of those tools are the Māori tools we take from our kete, which is haka, which is waiata, which is pōkeka — all of those things that our tīpuna have left us. Those are natural debating tools on the marae.”

    What does Parliament’s rulebook have to say?
    Parliament is governed by its own set of rules known as Standing Orders and Speakers’ Rulings. They endow the Speaker with the power and responsibility to “maintain order and decorum” in the House.

    The rules set out the procedures to be followed during a debate and subsequent vote. MPs are banned from using “offensive or disorderly words” or making a “personal reflection” against another member.

    MPs can also be found in contempt of Parliament if they obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions.

    Examples of contempt include assaulting, threatening or obstructing an MP, or “misconducting oneself” in the House.

    Under Standing Orders, Parliament’s proceedings can be temporarily suspended “in the case of any grave disorder arising in committee”.

    The Speaker may order any member “whose conduct is highly disorderly” to leave the chamber. For example, Brownlee ejected Labour MP Willie Jackson when he refused to apologise for calling Seymour a liar.

    The Speaker may also “name” any member “whose conduct is grossly disorderly” and then call for MPs to vote on their suspension, as occurred in the case of Maipi-Clarke.

    Members of the public gallery can also be required to leave if they interrupt proceedings or “disturb or disrupt the House”.

    ‘Abusing tikanga of Parliament’
    Seymour has previously criticised Te Pāti Māori for abusing the “the tikanga of Parliament,” and on Thursday he called for further consequences.

    “The Speaker needs to make it clear that the people of New Zealand who elect people to this Parliament have a right for their representative to be heard, not drowned out by someone doing a haka or getting in their face making shooting gestures,” Seymour said.

    Former Speaker Sir Lockwood Smith told RNZ the rules existed to allow rational and sensible debate on important matters.

    “Parliament makes the laws that govern all our lives, and its performance and behaviour has to be commensurate with that responsibility.

    “It is not just a stoush in a pub. It is the highest court in the land and its behaviour should reflect that.”

    Sir Lockwood said he respected Māori custom, but there were ways that could be expressed within the rules. He said he was also saddened by “the venom directed personally” at Seymour.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi day five: 10,000 join as Treaty bill protest halts traffic in Rotorua

    RNZ News

    An estimated 10,000 people have marched through Rotorua today as part of Hīkoi mō te Tiriti protesting against the controversial Treaty Principles Bill.

    Due to the size of the group, Fenton Street was blocked temporarily as the Hīkoi went through, police said.

    It is anticipated that this afternoon the main Hīkoi will travel via Taupō to Hastings, where participants will stay overnight.

    Meanwhile, in Gisborne, a smaller hīkoi of around 80 people left Te Poho-O-Rāwiri Marae this morning heading south, accompanied by several vehicles.

    There have been no problems reported at any of these locations.

    Hīkoi activation events have now concluded for Te Waipounamu South Island ahead of their convoy to Parliament.

    Tuesday, November 19 will mark day 10 of the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti and kotahitanga o Ngā Iwi ki Waitangi Park — everyone will meet at Waitangi Park on Wellington’s waterfont before walking to the steps of the parliamentary Beehive.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


    Hīkoi treaty bill protest heads south from Rotorua. Video: RNZ News

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Treaty Principles Bill is already straining social cohesion – a referendum could be worse

    ANALYSIS: By Alexander Gillespie, University of Waikato and Claire Breen, University of Waikato

    With the protest hīkoi from the Far North moving through Rotorua on its way to Wellington, it might be said ACT leader David Seymour has been granted his wish of generating an “important national conversation about the place of the Treaty in our constitutional arrangements”.

    Timed to coincide with the first reading of the contentious Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill yesterday — it passed with a vote of 68-55, the hīkoi and other similar protests are a response to what many perceive as a fundamental threat to New Zealand’s fragile constitutional framework.

    With no upper house, nor a written constitution, important laws can be fast-tracked or repealed by a simple majority of Parliament.

    As constitutional lawyer and former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer has argued about the current government’s legislative style and speed, the country “is in danger of lurching towards constitutional impropriety”.

    Central to this ever-shifting and contested political ground is te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi. For decades it has been woven into the laws of the land in an effort to redress colonial wrongs and guarantee a degree of fairness and equity for Māori.

    There is a significant risk the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill would undermine these achievements, as it attempts to negate recognised rights within the original document and curtail its application in a modern setting.

    But while the bill is almost guaranteed to fail because of the other coalition parties’ refusal to support it beyond the select committee, there is another danger. Contained in an explanatory note within the bill is the following clause:

    The Bill will come into force if a majority of electors voting in a referendum support it. The Bill will come into force 6 months after the date on which the official result of that referendum is declared.

    Were David Seymour to argue his bill has been thwarted by the standard legislative process and must be advanced by a referendum, the consequences for social cohesion could be significant.

    The referendum option
    While the bill would still need to become law for the referendum to take place, the option of putting it to the wider population — either as a condition of a future coalition agreement or orchestrated via a citizens-initiated referendum — should not be discounted.

    One recent poll showed roughly equal support for and against a referendum on the subject, with around 30 percent undecided. And Seymour has had success in the past with his End of Life Choice Act referendum in 2020.

    He will also have watched the recent example of Australia’s Voice referendum, which aimed to give a non-binding parliamentary voice to Indigenous communities but failed after a heated and divisive public debate.

    The lobby group Hobson’s Pledge, which opposes affirmative action for Māori and is led by former ACT politician Don Brash, has already signalled its intention to push for a citizens-initiated referendum, arguing: “We need to deliver the kind of message that the Voice referendum in Australia delivered.”

    The Treaty and the constitution
    ACT’s bill is not the first such attempt. In 2006, the NZ First Party — then part of a Labour-led coalition government — introduced the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill.

    That bill failed, but the essential argument behind it was that entrenching Treaty principles in law was “undermining race relations in New Zealand”. However, ACT’s current bill does not seek to delete those principles, but rather to define and restrain them in law.

    This would effectively begin to unpick decades of careful legislative work, threaded together from the deliberations of the Waitangi Tribunal, the Treaty settlements process, the courts and Parliament.

    As such, in mid-August the Tribunal found the first iteration of ACT’s bill

    would reduce the constitutional status of the Treaty/te Tiriti, remove its effect in law as currently recognised in Treaty clauses, limit Māori rights and Crown obligations, hinder Māori access to justice, impact Treaty settlements, and undermine social cohesion.

    In early November, the Tribunal added:

    If this Bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty/te Tiriti in modern times. If the Bill remained on the statute book for a considerable time or was never repealed, it could mean the end of the Treaty/te Tiriti.

    Social cohesion at risk
    Similar concerns have been raised by the Ministry of Justice in its advice to the government. In particular, the ministry noted the proposal in the bill may negate the rights articulated in Article II of the Treaty, which affirms the continuing exercise of tino rangatiratanga (self-determination):

    Any law which fails to recognise the collective rights given by Article II calls into question the very purpose of the Treaty and its status in our constitutional arrangements.

    The government has also been advised by the Ministry of Justice that the bill may lead to discriminatory outcomes inconsistent with New Zealand’s international legal obligations to eliminate discrimination and implement the rights of Indigenous peoples.

    All of these issues will become heightened if a referendum, essentially about the the removal of rights guaranteed to Māori in 1840, is put to the vote.

    Of course, citizens-initiated referendums are not binding on a government, but they carry much politically persuasive power nonetheless. And this is not to argue against their usefulness, even on difficult issues.

    But the profound constitutional and wider democratic implications of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, and any potential referendum on it, should give everyone pause for thought at this pivotal moment.The Conversation

    Dr Alexander Gillespie is professor of law, University of Waikato and Claire Breen is professor of Law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Hīkoi challenging controversial draft bill ‘redefines activism’, says Herald

    Pacific Media Watch

    As thousands take to the streets this week to “honour” the country’s 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, the largest daily newspaper New Zealand Herald says the massive event is “redefining activism”.

    The Hīkoi mō te Tiriti has been underway since Sunday, with thousands of New Zealanders from all communities and walks of life traversing the more than 2000 km length of the country from Cape Reinga to Bluff and converging on the capital Wellington.

    The marches are challenging the coalition government Act Party’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill, introduced last week by co-leader David Seymour.

    The Bill had its first reading in Parliament today as a young first time opposition Te Pāti Māori MP, Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, was suspended for leading a haka and ripping up a copy of the Bill disrupting the vote, and opposition Labour Party’s Māori Development spokesperson Willie Jackson was also “excused” from the chamber for calling Seymour a “liar” against parliamentary rules.

    After a second attempt at voting, the three coalition parties won 68-55 with all three opposition parties voting against.

    In its editorial today, hours before the debate and vote, The New Zealand Herald said supporters of Toitū te Tiriti, the force behind the Hīkoi, were seeking a community “reconnection” and described their kaupapa as an “activation, not activism; empowerment, not disruption; education, not protest”.

    “Many of the supporters on the Hīkoi don’t consider themselves political activists. They are mums and dads, rangatahi, professionals, Pākehā, and Tauiwi (other non-Māori ethnicities),” The Herald said.

    ‘Loaded, colonial language’
    “Mainstream media is often accused of using ‘loaded, colonial language’ in its headlines. Supporters of Toitū te Tiriti, however, see the movement not as a political protest but as a way to reconnect with the country’s shared history and reflect on New Zealand’s obligations under Te Tiriti.

    “While some will support the initiative, many Pākehā New Zealanders are responding to it with unequivocal anger; others feel discomfort about suggestions of colonial guilt or inherited privilege stemming from historical injustices.”

    The Herald said that politicians like Seymour advocated for a “multicultural” New Zealand, promising equal treatment for all cultures. While this vision sounded appealing, “it glosses over the partnership outlined in Te Tiriti”.

    “Seymour argues he is fighting for respect for all, but when multiculturalism is wielded as a political tool, it can obscure indigenous rights and maintain colonial dominance. For many, it’s an unsettling ideology to contemplate,” the newspaper said.

    “A truly multicultural society would recognise the unique status of tangata whenua, ensuring Māori have a voice in decision-making as the indigenous people.

    “However, policies framed under ‘equal rights’ often silence Māori perspectives and undermine the principles of Te Tiriti.

    “Seymour’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill prioritises Crown sovereignty, diminishing the role of hapū (sub-tribes) and excluding Māori from national decision-making. Is this the ‘equality’ we seek, or is it a rebranded form of colonial control?”

    Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke
    Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke . . . led a haka and tore up a copy of Seymour’s Bill in Parliament. Image: TVNZ screenshot APR

    Heart of the issue
    The heart of the issue, said The Herald, was how “equal” was interpreted in the context of affirmative action.

    “Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel argues that true equality acknowledges historical injustices and demands action to correct them. In Aotearoa, addressing the legacy of colonisation is essential,” the paper said.

    “Affirmative action is not about giving an unfair advantage; it’s about levelling the playing field so everyone has equal opportunities.

    “Some politicians sidestep the real work needed to honour Te Tiriti by pushing for an ‘equal’ and ‘multicultural’ society. This approach disregards Aotearoa’s unique history, where tangata whenua hold a constitutionally recognised status.

    “The goal is not to create division but to fulfil a commitment made more than 180 years ago and work towards a partnership based on mutual respect. We all have a role to play in this partnership.

    “The Hīkoi mō te Tiriti is more than a march; it’s a movement rooted in education, healing, and building a shared future.

    “It challenges us to look beyond superficial equality and embrace a partnership where all voices are heard and the mana (authority) of tangata whenua is upheld.”

    The first reading of the bill was advanced in a failed attempt to distract from the impact of the national Hikoi.

    RNZ reports that more than 40 King’s Counsel lawyers say the Bill seeks to “rewrite the Treaty itself” and have called on Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” the draft law.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • NZ’s Treaty Principles Bill passes first reading after Māori MP evicted over haka

    RNZ News

    New Zealand’s controversial Treaty Principles Bill passed its first reading in Parliament today and will now go to the Justice Committee for consideration as the national Hīkoi continued its journey to the capital.

    Opposition Te Pati Māori’s Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke was suspended from the House following a haka.

    Maipi-Clarke interrupted the vote on the Bill’s first reading with the Ka Mate haka taken up by members of the opposition and people in the public gallery.

    Meanwhile, thousands continued their Hīkoi mō te Tiriti on the fourth day towards Wellington opposed to the draft legislation.

    A huge crowd earlier stopped traffic in Hamilton as the national Hīkoi made its way through the city.

    During the haka by Maipi-Clarke, Speaker Gerry Brownlee rose to his feet.

    When it finished, he suspended Parliament and asked for the public gallery to be cleared.

    First vote attempt disrupted
    It caused enough disruption that the Speaker suspended Parliament during the vote on the first reading.

    Labour’s Māori Development spokesperson Willie Jackson was ejected from the House after calling the Bill’s sponsor ACT leader David Seymour a “liar” — breaking parliamentary rules.

    When the House returned, Brownlee said Maipi-Clarke’s behaviour was “grossly disorderly”, “appallingly disrespectful”, and “premeditated”.

    The government parties voted in favour of the Bill, with opposition parties voting against.

    The bill passed its first reading in spite of the opposition Greens calling for its MPs to be allowed to vote individually on their conscience.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    Labour MP Willie Jackson “excused” from the House.  Video: RNZ

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi day four: Setting off from Huntly on way to Wellington – bill reading

    RNZ News

    Thousands of people are continuing their North Island hīkoi as the legislation they are protesting against, the Treaty Principles Bill, gets its first reading in Parliament today.

    The hīkoi enters day four and headed off from Huntly, destined for Rotorua today, after it advanced through Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau yesterday.

    Traffic was at a standstill in Kirikiriroa Hamilton and the hīkoi has filled the road from one side to the other.

    Meanwhile, members of the King’s Counsel, some of New Zealand’s most senior legal minds, say the controversial bill “seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself” and are calling on the prime minister and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” it.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Senior NZ lawyers call for Treaty Principles Bill to be abandoned

    By Lillian Hanly, RNZ political reporter

    Members of the King’s Counsel, some of New Zealand’s most senior legal minds, say the controversial Treaty Principles Bill “seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself” and are calling on the prime minister and the coalition government to “act responsibly now and abandon” it.

    More than 40 KCs have written to the prime minister and attorney-general outlining their “grave concerns” about the substance of the Treaty Principles Bill and its wider implications for the country’s constitutional arrangements.

    The bill is set to have its first reading in the House on Thursday, and has led to nationwide protests, with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon himself calling it “divisive”.

    Its architect, ACT leader David Seymour, has said the purpose is to provide certainty and clarity and to “promote a national conversation about their place in our constitutional arrangements”.

    “I can see why they don’t like the Treaty Principles Bill. Everyone gets a say, even if you’re not a KC,” Seymour said in a statement.

    “The debate over the Treaty has until this point been dominated by a small number of judges, senior public servants, academics, and politicians.”

    He said the select committee process would finally “democratise” the debate.

    Co-governance, ethnic quotas
    “The courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have been able to develop principles that have been used to justify actions that are contrary to the principle of equal rights. Those actions include co-governance in the delivery of public services and ethnic quotas in public institutions.

    “The Treaty Principles Bill provides an opportunity for New Zealanders — rather than the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal — to have a say on what the Treaty means. Did the Treaty give different rights to different groups, or does every citizen have equal rights? I believe all New Zealanders deserve to have a say on that question,” Seymour said.

    The senior members of the independent bar view the introduction of the bill (and the intended referendum) as “wholly inappropriate as a way of addressing such an important and complex constitutional issue”.

    The letter states the existing principles (including partnership, active protection, equity and redress) are “designed to reflect the spirit and intent of the Treaty as a whole and the mutual obligations and responsibilities of the parties”. They say the principles now represent “settled law”.

    The letter said the coalition’s bill sought to “redefine in law the meaning of te Tiriti, by replacing the existing ‘Treaty principles’ with new Treaty principles which are said to reflect the three articles of te Tiriti”.

    The hīkoi passes through Dargaville, Tuesday, 12 November 2024.
    The hīkoi passing through Dargaville yesterday. Image: Layla Bailey-McDowell/RNZ

    The lawyers say those proposed principles do not reflect te Tiriti, and, by “imposing a contested definition of the three articles, the bill seeks to rewrite the Treaty itself”.

    The Treaty Principles Bill, they say, would have the “effect of unilaterally changing the meaning of te Tiriti and its effect in law, without the agreement of Māori as the Treaty partner”.

    Historical settlements
    The proposed principle 2 “retrospectively limits Māori rights to those that existed at 1840”, they said, and the bill states that “if those rights ‘differ from the rights of everyone’, then they are only recognised to the extent agreed in historical Treaty settlements with the Crown”.

    The lawyers said that erased the Crown’s Article 2 guarantee to Māori of tino rangatiratanga.

    “By recognising Māori rights only when incorporated into Treaty settlements with the Crown, this proposed principle also attempts to exclude the courts, which play a crucial role in developing the common law and protecting indigenous and minority rights.”

    They also explained the proposed principle 3 did not “recognise the fundamental Article 2 guarantee to Māori of the right to be Māori and to have their tikanga Māori (customs, values and customary law) recognised and protected in our law”.

    They said it was not for the government of the day to “retrospectively and unilaterally reinterpret constitutional treaties”.

    “This would offend the basic principles which underpin New Zealand’s representative democracy.”

    They added that the bill would cause significant legal confusion and uncertainty, “inevitably resulting in protracted litigation and cost”, and would have the “opposite effect of its stated purpose of providing certainty and clarity”.

    In regards to the wider process and impact of the bill, they pointed to a lack of meaningful engagement as well as the finding by the Waitangi Tribunal that the Bill was a breach of the Treaty.

    The ACT Party has long argued the original articles have been interpreted by the courts, the Waitangi Tribunal and successive governments — over decades — in a way that has amplified their significance and influence beyond the original intent.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi day three: Thousands of protesters walk across Auckland Harbour Bridge

    RNZ News

    Thousands of supporters of Aotearoa New Zealand’s hīkoi mō te Tiriti — a march traversing the length of Aotearoa in protest against the Treaty Principles Bill and government policies impacting on Māori — have crossed the Auckland Harbour Bridge.

    RNZ reporters with the march said it was swaying and rocking as the protesters descended on the Westhaven side of the bridge.

    Earlier, Auckland commuters were advised to plan ahead as the hīkoi makes its way over the Harbour Bridge.

    Waka Kotahi and police say the two outer northbound lanes closed from 8.30am on Wednesday and would not re-open until around 11am. Some other on- and off-ramps will also be closed until further notice.

    The hīkoi begins the Harbour Bridge crossing.  Video: RNZ News
    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • NZ abuse in care apology called PR stunt,’tokenistic’ by some survivors

    By Lillian Hanly, RNZ News political reporter

    Survivors of abuse in care arrived at Parliament today to hear the formal apology from the state which oversaw and inflicted harm on children.

    Public sector leaders from Oranga Tamariki, the Ministry of Health, New Zealand Police, and Ministry of Education also apologised, as did the public service commissioner and the solicitor-general, at an event preceding Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s national apology in the House.

    By the afternoon, many survivors were still trying to absorb what had been said and what it meant, with some saying it was a “PR stunt,” some calling the speeches “hollow” and others not willing to believe the words until they saw action.


    Abuse in state care — survivor reactions.   Video: RNZ

    During his apology, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said many survivors did not want to engage with the current compensation process — but more than 3500 were — and he signalled there would be an extra $32 million funnelled into that system “while we work on the new redress system”.

    Opposition leader Chris Hipkins said he formally joined with the government in its apology, saying the day was a significant step forward.

    “Today is a hugely important day for all of you, to finally hear what the Crown has failed to give you for all of these years, an apology.”

    Ken Clearwater, a long-time advocate for survivors, was at the event, saying he heard some great words but it was about “what action needs to go with it”.

    “Everyone’s saying the right things, but if you look at the policies and stuff we have at the moment, that’s not helping our children.”

    He believed National, leader of the coalition government, was going to have to change a lot of their policies.

    “So we’re apologising for what happened in the past, but the policies are still in place that are making it no different than when we were in the past.

    ‘Hollow words .. . dangerous’
    “To have hollow words at this stage would be, would be pretty dangerous.”

    Signs from protestors sit outside Parliament during the apology for abuse in state care
    Signs from protesters sit outside Parliament during the apology for abuse in state care today. Image: VNP/ Louis Collins/RNZ

    He said there had to be a belief the government would look into things, “but there’s got to be a survivor voice”.

    He mentioned Tu Chapman, a survivor who spoke at the event, who pointed out only having five minutes to speak as a survivor at an apology for survivors.

    “So once again, the survivor voice is not forefront, and I think that that’s what they’re going to have to look at, is how they get more more of the survivor voice in whatever policies they look at.”

    Another survivor, Reihana Tahau, who had been in state care in the 1980s, agreed, saying he found it ironic there was an apology on one hand while the government goes through the process of appealing Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act.

    For him, he said, “that’s the opposite, that’s counterintuitive” because 7AA was helping to stop bringing children into care.

    “I can’t understand why they would appeal something that is actually working.

    ‘Mistrust, systematic trauma’
    “And for me, my mistrust and systematic trauma, I can’t help but feeling that they’re not genuine in that, because if they were genuine, they wouldn’t be taking a thing which would potentially set up another generation for trauma.”

    He acknowledged the apology was a step in the right direction, but “it still feels like a PR thing”.

    “I do find it hard to trust people that read off a paper, because I talk from my heart.”

    He said the speech from the prime minister was “part of his job” and he did not know how “authentic that is”.

    Prime Minister Christopher Luxon
    Reihana Tahau questioned how genuine Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s apology was. Image: RNZ

    Another survivor, Nicky, also said it was a “PR stunt”, and would not provide closure.

    “This is a PR stunt for the prime minister to look good.”

    Ardern thanked
    She acknowledged Dame Jacinda Ardern for initiating the apology.

    “We’d like to thank her for starting it, but they’ve sat on things, you know, for a quarter of a century we’ve been battling.

    “We’re old, we’re broken but we’re still fighting.”

    She called specifically for Salvation Army orphanages to be investigated and for their charitable status to be investigated.

    “The government paid them to abuse me. We want that money.

    “Where did that money go? It didn’t go in our care, it didn’t go in our food, and they worked us like child labour, just like Gloriavale [a small and isolated Christian community located on the West Coast of the South Island].”

    Survivors in the room muttered or called out during the speeches, reacting — but saved their strongest reaction for Solicitor-General Una Jagose.

    Boos, cries of ‘shame’
    As she rose to speak, she was met with boos, and cries of “shame” and “disgrace”. One woman stood and turned her back. Another shouted: “You wanted us dead.”

    Another survivor, who listened quietly and intently throughout the proceedings with tears streaming at times, said he wanted to hear what the public sector leaders had to say.

    He said what Jagose said needed to be said.

    “I’m disappointed, because I’m a lawyer, I’m disappointed that she was howled down and I couldn’t hear all that she said.”

    He said he thought Jagose would be used by the government as a scapegoat.

    “Us lawyers have to speak for the people we represent, whether they’re good or bad.

    “And we shouldn’t be hung drawn and quartered because we’ve been instructed to say something or do something or fight something.”

    Clearwater said he could not believe she was there.

    ‘Nobody wanted her there’
    “By the noise there, nobody wanted her there, and so that was a bad choice on the government’s part.”

    Tu Chapman spoke on behalf of survivors at the event, and did not think the chief executives should have been at the event apologising.

    “It’s like putting the cart before the horse so to speak.”

    Chapman was angry the prime minister left before hearing some speeches, saying it was “tokenistic”.

    “I think he should have been there to listen to us, so that he could actually, authentically and genuinely apologise to us in the House this afternoon or early this morning.

    “And it might have been a little bit more meaningful, because quite right now, it just feels tokenistic.”

    Another survivor said the speeches today were “very empty, hollow”.

    ‘Carbon copy’ speech
    He said the prime minister’s speech seemed to be a “carbon copy” of when he had been there for the tabling of the report.

    In regards to the solicitor-general, he acknowledged “she was able to take what was getting handed to her and listen to it”.

    “She actually took it on and then spoke when she could.”

    He said the others seemed to want to get over with the speech fast, “that’s not how you do apologies”.

    “You take what’s coming, surely they knew there was going to be some heckling going on.”

    His message to the prime minister was not to wait, “take action now”.

    Survivors representing mothers and adopted children said they felt they had been missed out of the equation.

    More about abuse victims
    One acknowledged today was more about abuse victims, but there could be a separate apology for mothers and their children that were “taken from them unlawfully and unwilling”.

    “We would like the history of losing our children told in this country.

    “I’ve flown from Australia for this and for the few words that were said, I really thought it was pretty poor.”

    They want a full inquiry into what happened and an apology.

    Another said in regards to the apologies, there were “some people who probably needed a brandy after getting up and speaking and apologising for the departments they worked for”.

    “There was one in particular who shouldn’t have been there at all, who shouldn’t represent anybody, let alone the Crown.”

    Healing process
    Piiata Tiakitai Turi-Heenan said today was needed as part of the healing process for survivors, “this is a start”.

    She also did not think the speeches were authentic.

    “The words that were authentic came from the survivors themselves.”

    She said if the government was looking for answers, they will come from “sitting down with the survivors and sorting everything out with them, rather than around a table with people who have had no experience of surviving”.

    On the disruption of the speeches, she said “those were emotions”.

    “The focus was on silencing those emotions, but that’s exactly why we are where we are today, because they were silenced in the first place.

    “You have permission to not be silent anymore.”

    Heart ‘on sleeve’
    Another survivor said his heart was “on his sleeve at the moment”.

    He had been speaking to various MPs after the event who assured him there was support across the House to make changes.

    “I believe they’re sincere, but I’m still, I’m still thinking that I might get let down, but I’m hoping I’m wrong. I’m hoping that it does go ahead.

    “Where to for me from here is that I’m gonna keep on doing what I do, until further notice, until I know for a fact, well, this is real.”

    Chapman added the journey was only just beginning again for the survivor community.

    “Another mechanism for us now is to actually encourage our survivor community to be more intentional about their engagement with the Crown, with ministers, and hold them to account.”

    The new redress scheme
    The minister in charge of the government response, Erica Stanford, told RNZ Checkpoint the current redress system was not perfect but the announced $32 million of funding to increase capacity and get through claims faster would help.

    While some survivors queried why redress could not be addressed sooner, Stanford said nobody expected the government would be able to “turn on a dime” and deliver something straight away.

    “We will have something up and running next year,” Stanford said, but she could not commit to an exact date.

    Outbursts from survivors during the apology had been expected, Stanford said, due to the amount of “raw emotion” in the room.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi mō te Tiriti sets off from Whangārei on day two

    RNZ News

    Emotions are running high as the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti has been welcomed to Laurie Hill Park in Whangārei by mana whenua.

    Thousands have arrived to support the kaupapa — young and old, tangata whenua and tangata tiriti, all to make a stand for the rights of Māori.

    The crowd have joined in waiata before being addressed by rangatira.

    An RNZ reporter at the scene says among the crowd, emotions are high and tears can be seen in some people’s eyes.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Hīkoi mō te Tiriti day one: ‘Lets make this hīkoi build a nation’

    RNZ News

    From the misty peaks of Cape Reinga to the rain-soaked streets of Kawakawa, Aotearoa New Zealand’s national hīkoi mō Te Tiriti rolled through the north and arrived in Whangārei.

    Since setting off this morning numbers have swelled from a couple of hundred to well over 1000 people, demonstrating their opposition to the coalition government’s controversial Treaty Principles Bill and other policies impacting on Māori.

    Hundreds gathered for a misty covered dawn karakia at Te Rerenga Wairua, the very top of the North Island, after meeting at the nearby town of Te Kāo the night before.

    Among them was veteran Māori rights activist and former MP Hone Harawira. He says the hīkoi is about protesting against a “blitzkreig of oppression” from the government and uplifting Māori.

    Harawira praised organisers of the hīkoi and set out his own hopes for the march.

    “It’s been a great start to the day . . .  to come here to Te Rerenga Wairua with people from all around the country and just join together, have a karakia, have some waiata and start to move on. We’re ready to go and Wellington is waiting — we can’t keep them waiting.

    “One of our kuia said it best last night. The last hīkoi built a party — the Māori Party — [but] let’s make this hīkoi build a nation. Let us focus on that,” Harawira said.

    Margie Thomson and her partner James travelled from Auckland to join the hīkoi.

    She said as a Pākeha, she was gutted by some of the government policies toward Māori and wanted to show support.

    The national hīkoi passes through Kaitaia on 11 November 2024.
    The national hīkoi passes through Kaitaia. Image: Peter de Graaf

    “The spirit of the people here is really profound . . . if people could feel they would really see the reality of the kāupapa here — the togetherness. This is really something, there is a really strong Māori movement and you really feel it.”

    By lunchtime the hīkoi had reached Kaiatia where numbers swelled to well over 1000 people. The main street had to be closed to traffic while supporters filled the streets with flags, waiata and haka.

    Tahlia, 10, made sure she had the best viewl, as people lined the streets as Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti draws closer to Kawakawa, on its first day, 11 November, 2024.
    Tahlia, 10, made sure she had the best view, as people lined the streets as Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti drew closer to Kawakawa, on the first day, 11 November, 2024. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf

    The hīkoi arrived in Whangārei this evening after covering a distance of around 280 km.

    Kākā Porowini marae in central Whangārei was hosting some of the supporters and its chair, Taipari Munro, said they were prepared to care for the masses

    “Hapu are able to pull those sorts of things together. But of course it will build as the hīkoi travels south.

    “The various marae and places where people will be hosted, will all be under preparation now.”

    Hirini Tau, Hirini Henare and Mori Rapana lead the hīkoi through Kawakawa, on 11 November, 2024.
    Hirini Tau, Hirini Henare and Mori Rapana lead the hīkoi through Kawakawa today. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf

    Three marae have been made available for people to stay at in Whangārei and some kai will also be provided, he said.

    Meanwhile, the Māori Law Society has set up a phone number to provide free legal assistance to marchers taking part in the hīkoi.

    Spokesperson Echo Haronga said Māori lawyers wanted to support the hīkoi in their own way.

    “This helpline is a demonstration of our manaakitanga as Māori legal professionals wanting to tautoko those people who are on the hīkoi. If a question arises for them, they’re not quite sure how handle it during the hīkoi then they know they can call this number they can speak to a Māori lawyer.”

    Ngāti Hine Health Trust staff, and others, wait to welcome Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti, as it draws closer to Kawakawa, on its first day, 11 November, 2024.
    Ngāti Hine Health Trust staff and others wait to welcome Te Hīkoi mō te Tiriti, as it drew closer to Kawakawa today. Image: RNZ/Peter de Graaf

    Haronga stressed that she did not anticipate any issues or disturbances with the police and the helpline was open to any questions or concerns not just police and criminal enquiries.

    “It’s not actually limited to people causing a ruckus and being in trouble with the police, it also could be someone who has a question . . . and they wouldn’t know otherwise where to go to, you can also call us for that if it’s in relation to hīkoi business.”

    Hīkoi supporters will stay in Whangārei for the night before travelling to Dargaville and Auckland’s North Shore tomorrow.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Meeting with Seymour ‘pointless’, says protest hīkoi organiser

    RNZ News

    Leaders of a hīkoi against David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill have rejected the ACT party leader’s offer of a meeting as they set off for Wellington.

    A dawn karakia at Te Rerenga Wairua launched the national hīkoi today.

    Hīkoi mō te Tiriti participants gathered for a dawn blessing ahead of a nine-day journey to Wellington. Police are preparing for 25,000 people to join, while organisers are hoping for as many as 40,000.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Polls Have Barely Opened, And Already Trump Has Raised The Spectre of A ‘Stolen Election’… Unless He Wins, Of Course

    Polling hasn’t even opened in some US states, and already former Republican president Donald Trump has begun setting the stage to claim the election is rigged… but only if he doesn’t win. In other words, he’s having a bet each way, which suggests that deep down, Trump suspects he might lose again. Chris Graham explains.

    After casting his ballot in Palm Beach, Florida, shortly after the polls opened, Trump spoke to reporters alongside wife Melania. True to form, most of what he said was untrue.

    Trump voted by mail-in ballot in 2016 and 2020, but after losing to Biden claimed the mail-in ballots were corrupt. So this year, he’s voted in person. And he now claims that any vote not cast on election day itself is suspect. There has been  zero evidence so far of widespread voter fraud, just like in 2020.

    Pointedly, however, Trump’s also claimed to be very confident of winning… provided nothing ‘happens’ like it did when he lost to Biden .

    “I ran a great campaign [this time]. Maybe the best of the three,” Trump said, a reference to the three campaigns he’s now contested for the US presidential elections.

    Of course, Trump won in 2016 and lost in 2020, and 2024 looks to be on a knife’s edge. But according to Trump, it should be an easy win.

    “We did great in the first one (2016). We did much better in the second one (2020), but something happened. And I would say this was the best campaign we’ve run.

    “I feel very confident. We went in with a very big lead today, and it looks like Republicans have shown up in force.”

    Trump hasn’t gone into the election with ‘a big lead today’. The polls virtually everywhere – even amongst pollsters who favour the Republican – show a very tight race, with Kamala Harris and Trump neck-and-neck in the battleground states (although Harris is expected to win the popular vote by a significant margin, just Biden did in 2020).

    Of course, the former reality TV star may ultimately win the election fair and square (a relative term in a campaign built around an extraordinary series of lies by Trump, about virtually every area of public policy).

    Film-maker Michael Moore, who successfully predicted a Trump victory in 2016, claimed over the weekend that the former president was “toast”. But most commentators have tipped it to be close.

    Whatever happens, it will almost certainly come down to seven swing states: Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada (with the caveat that a shock poll in Iowa, a traditionally red state, gave Harris a 3-point lead just two days out from the election).

    Biden won six of the seven (all but North Carolina) in 2020, but current polling suggests Trump might be ahead in Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. Harris is favoured in Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania is considered too close to call. It’s also the biggest cache of electoral college votes (20) and if the election is tight, could end up being the state that decides the outcome.

    In 2020, Biden won Pennsylvania by just over 80,000 votes, but that’s out of almost 7 million electors. The margin was just 1.16%, and it looks much together than that on paper today.

    That said, the US polls have been notoriously inaccurate in recent years. They’ve under- and over-estimated support for both major parties. In particular, they predicted a ‘red wave’ for the Republicans at the 2022 mid-term elections, which never came to pass – Trump candidates were soundly defeated in virtually every contest, and Biden led an historic defense of the Senate (the party in the White House usually loses support by the mid-terms).

    But for now, with the polls open for another eight hours or so in some western states,

    And Trump is staying on script until the polls close: in Palm Beach he continued to focus on promoting ‘fear and loathing in the US’, telling reporters crime was “through the roof” (it’s generally down across the US), and claiming that immigration was the biggest problem facing the country.

    Since the pandemic, surveys have consistently shown that Americans view the economy and the cost of living as the biggest concerns, followed by immigration and abortion rights.

    We’ll find out in a few hours whether or not the surveys were correct, or whether Trump has managed to pull a fragile nation even further to the right.

    The post The Polls Have Barely Opened, And Already Trump Has Raised The Spectre of A ‘Stolen Election’… Unless He Wins, Of Course appeared first on New Matilda.

    This post was originally published on New Matilda.

  • Palestine advocate condemns NZ silence over Israel’s UN attacks

    Asia Pacific Report

    The national chair of one of New Zealand’s leading pro-Palestine advocacy groups has condemned New Zealand over remaining “totally silent” over Israeli military and diplomatic attacks on the United Nations, blaming this on a “refusal to offend” Tel Aviv.

    Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) chair John Minto said he was appalled at the New Zealand response to the Israeli parliamentary vote last week to ban UNRWA operations in Israel and East Jerusalem.

    The Israeli government followed up on this today by cancelling the UNRWA agreement, effectively closing down the major Palestinian refugee aid organisation’s desperately needed work in the Gaza Strip.

    “UNRWA was set up by the United Nations to assist the hundreds of thousands Palestinian refugees expelled by Israel in 1948, pending their right of return — which Israel refuses to recognise,” Minto said in a statement.

    “Israel sees UNRWA as an unwelcome reminder of Palestinian national rights and has always aimed to get rid of it. Support for banning UNRWA came from the Zionist New Zealand Jewish Council earlier this year.”

    Israel has also recently shelled United Nations peacekeeping positions in Lebanon and has killed an estimated 230 UNRWA workers in Gaza.

    “Our government has previously stated how important UNRWA relief work is for Palestinian refugees in Gaza. The US government says the UNRWA supply of food, water and medicine is ‘irreplaceable’,” Minto said.

    NZ role ‘shallow, non-existent’
    “Yet, under no doubt as a result of Israeli lobbying, our commitment to the UN and its work is increasingly exposed as somewhere between shallow and non-existent.”


    Israel cancels agreement with UNRWA.    Video: Al Jazeera

    Minto said other Western governments had been critical of the UNRWA ban and the recent Israeli refusal to allow the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to enter Israel.

    Despite New Zealand having UN peacekeepers in the Lebanon border areas, it failed to join more than 40 countries which condemned the military attacks on a number of UNIFIL bases in south Lebanon last month.

    “Our government refuses to offend Israel in any way. Even major arms suppliers to Israel, particularly the US, France and the UK, have been sometimes critical of what is a genocide by Israel in Gaza,” Minto said.

    “In contrast, the New Zealand government blames Hamas for all the killing and destruction committed by Israel, though it also finds space to condemn Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran.”

    Previous New Zealand governments have formally rebuked Israel for its violence, most recently former Foreign Minister Murry McCully in 2010 and former Prime Minister John Key in 2014 — “both by summoning in the Israeli ambassador”.

    “This time, when Israeli attacks on Gaza are becoming even more savage and sadistic by the day, our Foreign Minister and his government remains inactive and silent,” Minto said.

    Israeli ethnic cleansing
    He said the Israeli war crimes in Gaza now clearly included ethnic cleansing.

    “Reports of what is called the Israeli ‘General’s Plan’ are now widespread in our news media,” Minto said.

    “The General’s Plan is a vile combination of military assault, starvation and exclusion of both aid workers and news media, to hide and facilitate the ‘death march’ of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from north of the Netzarim Corridor.

    “This is to prepare for a resumption of illegal Israeli colonisation in northern Gaza.”

    “In September, our government voted with 123 other countries for a UN General Assembly resolution to demand that Israel withdraw from the Occupied Palestinian Territories without delay.”

    “That was welcome.”

    “What is not welcome is for New Zealand to then stand by when genocidal Israel carries out ethnic cleansing on a massive scale to once again spit on the UN and increase its occupation of Palestinian lands.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • In Defence Of Conspiracy Theorists: It’s The Trauma, Stupid

    In case you’ve been living under a rock, there’s a US presidential election in the wings this week. But whatever Tuesday’s outcome, the one group of folks you probably shouldn’t blame for the outcome are the ‘conspiracy theorists’. Dr Kari James looks back on the recent assassination attempt on Donald Trump to help explain why ‘believing crazy things’ isn’t always, necessarily, ‘crazy’. And an ironic and sarcastic trigger warning for bleeding heart lefties: you’re potentially going to be distressed to find out why.

    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

    Hanlon’s razor implores us to not give our governments and institutions undue credit in deeming them capable of conspiracies. They’re probably just inept.

    But there are folks among us who won’t attribute to incompetence that which can be explained by malice.

    An assassination attempt on the former POTUS is a Pavlovian signal for conspiratorial drool. So, the Secret Service couldn’t just be inept. If they are, we’d have to ask hard questions of them, like whether they prioritise DEI quotas above competence.

    Instead, they must be either part of a conspiracy to assassinate the former POTUS or part of a conspiracy to cement a Trump comeback, depending on which side of the political aisle you sway.

    The mainstream media are having a field day generating clickbait from partisan brainfarts.

    The left of the spectrum frustratingly sheds little light beyond denigrating conspiracy theorists as wingnut idiots and losers.

    The mooment former US president Donald Trump is shot on July 13, during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania for the 2024 presidency.

    There’s an ironic cachet associated with claiming to be the sensible, logical adults in the room while poking fun at folks who distrust the United States’ ‘sharp as a tack’ leadership in an era of heightened political tension and word salad.

    In 2022, Professor Matt Hornsey and his team at the University of Queensland published a comprehensive review of research into conspiracy theories. They confirmed that personality-related factors – like whether someone is a wingnut, an idiot, or a loser – are a bit of a nothingburger when it comes to predicting who’s likely to engage in conspiracy beliefs.

    And both sides of the political aisle engage in motivated reasoning for their pet beliefs.

    Anecdotally, the first woo-woo whispers I heard were from Left-identifying colleagues, hinting that Trump’s near-miss back in mid-July in Pennsylvania was his version of a Reichstag Fire, engineered to sway the election in his favour. What are the odds the former president choreographed his moves so precisely as to only lose the tip of his ear to a bullet?

    Is it less likely that purposefully lax security allowed for the possibility that a lone gunman could slip through the cracks?

     

    What if Malice Actually Explains it?

    Much of the media frames conspiracy theories as a comfort blanket for pitiable folks desperate for a sense of certainty and control in the face of seemingly random violence. But this framing lacks support from the empirical literature.

    While conspiracy beliefs do grow stronger when people feel powerless, exposure to conspiracy theories typically increases a person’s sense of powerlessness by reducing their sense of control.

    So maybe it’s not about needing a sense of control in the face of randomness. Maybe folks who won’t attribute to incompetence that which can be explained by malice are simply folks who’ve had a lot of experience on the receiving end of malice.

    Perhaps they know it when they see it.

    Or perhaps it’s like when you buy a new car and then you see that model everywhere you go. The Baader-Meinhof effect applied to nefarious villains and their stooges.

    In symptomatic survivors of both simple and complex trauma, fear and loss of trust generalize beyond the epicentre of a traumatic experience, projected, as it were, onto subsequent neutral experiences.

    It seems we have an inbuilt mechanism designed to protect us from a repeat of what hurt us.

     

    The Fault Line of Identity Politics

    Dutch researchers Jan-Willen van Prooijen and Mark van Vugt propose that conspiracy theories evolved as a means of alerting us to and protecting us from hostile coalitions or outgroups.

    Their adaptive conspiracism hypothesis makes sense. By definition, conspiracy theories involve the notion that coalitions of individuals are acting in their own interests and against the interests of others.

    Ingroups are typically defined by arbitrary identities associated with nationality, ethnicity, religion, ideology, or political affiliations. Identity therefore demarcates the fault lines along which ingroups and outgroups are divided.

    A standout example of this is international differences in subscription to 9/11 conspiracy theories. In the wake of the attacks, 22% of Canadians surveyed believed they were an inside job. Across a range of Muslim nations, 78% of individuals surveyed endorsed the conspiracy theory.

    new matilda, 911, terrorism
    An inside job? If you live in a Muslim country, you’re significantly more likely to think so than someone from, say, Canada. (IMAGE: U.S. Navy photo by Chief Photographer’s Mate Eric J. Tilford, Flickr)

    So, in parts of the world well-experienced with the receiving end of US military aggression, folks were more likely to believe the US government would do something nefarious as a pretext for bombing them.

    Does this mean people who are historically on the receiving end of aggression are more likely to endorse conspiracy theories?

    If so, what does this say about those of us who ridicule them?

    Well, the interesting somethingburger in Matt Hornsey’s research was this: we are all prone to believing in conspiracy theories. It just depends on our sociohistorical context as to whether or not we will.

     

    The Role of Historical Trauma

    Historical trauma is a term that applies to the collective trauma of populations who share arbitrary group characteristics like ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. Typical examples of historical trauma include war, occupation, or colonialism, and systemic abuses such as genocide, slavery, and dispossession.

    Unsurprisingly, such experiences lead survivors to feel oppressed, victimised and powerless, even generations on from the epicentre of their collective trauma. Many also become paranoid and suspicious, over-generalising from their past experiences.

    These people are often the survivors of actual conspiracies in which perpetrators and aggressors succeeded in their objectives by concealing their true intentions and propagandising would-be witnesses into believing in their virtues and/or the inherent deficits in their victims.

    Often the victims only come to realize the extent of what has been done to them and members of their group later, having been successfully duped themselves.

    Fool me once, as they say.

    As it happens, conspiracy theorists are hellbent on not being fooled twice. For obvious and compelling reasons. So, they become hypervigilant to signs of threat.

    Of course, false positives abound. Especially when historically traumatised people successfully move to places where they are not oppressed or victimised. Or when formerly conflict-ridden regions enter periods of peace. Or when the formerly enslaved are liberated.

    Far from being maladaptive, the development of an extreme defence against persecution is highly adaptive. What we witness is survivor bias, as false negatives can prove fatal; those who are successfully duped don’t live to tell the tale.

     

    The Trauma Triad

    Historical trauma underpins belief in conspiracy theories in three ways: a sense of powerlessness, victim mindset, and status degradation.

    A sense of powerlessness is common among survivors of both historical trauma and present-day institutional or systemic abuses, which is why rebuilding a sense of agency is integral to the treatment of trauma.

    The perpetrator outgroup is viewed, in contrast, as powerful and agentic, having gained power by stealing from the victim ingroup.

    A victim mindset leads people to behave as though they are under siege, and thus perceive and interpret the behaviour of outgroups as potentially threatening, even when neutral or positive.

    When under siege, people are fearful, suspicious, and on guard, ready to respond to any perceived threat.

    (IMAGE: Gage Skidmore | Flickr)

    This siege mentality is not just the domain of tinfoil hatters and MAGA Republicans. It’s also prevalent amongst historically oppressed or marginalised groups including ethnic minorities, colonised populations, and the LGBTIQ community, for whom life under siege is not a distant memory.

    The status degradation endured by the historically oppressed positions them as low-status citizens, expected to suck up their circumstances and accept material disadvantage. This deprivation results in prolonged insecurity and uncertainty, which in turn lowers trust in government and other authorities.

    So, it’s not surprising that conspiracy theorists tend to cluster around the poverty line. Representation of conspiracy theories is a lot higher in countries where per-capita GDP is low, and where inequality is high.

    There is also a discernible increase in conspiracy theorising during – and in the aftermath of – periods of economic instability. As economic vitality is viewed as a metric for a government’s commitments to its population, it serves as an indicator of whether the government can be trusted.

     

    The Erosion of Trust

    Endorsement of conspiracy theories is also higher in countries rated as more corrupt, where trust in authorities is understandably low.

    Indeed, in a paper by French researchers Laurent Cordonier and Florian Cafiero published this year, the authors suggest that public sector corruption is fertile ground for conspiracy theories because it renders them plausible.

    Authoritarian states also produce far more conspiracy theorists than democratic ones.

    A far cry from the stereotype of a young, pallid, neckbearded misogynist who lives in his mum’s basement, Cordonier and Cafiero’s study of 21 countries suggests the average conspiracy theorist is far more likely to be an elderly Indonesian genocide survivor or a black South African who remembers Apartheid all too well.

    It is not, contrary to commonly received wisdom, irrational for people subject to oppressive regimes riddled with corruption to distrust their governments and institutions. Lies and cover-ups warrant skepticism; the gullible in such cases are perhaps those who don’t believe in conspiracy theories.

    I say all this with one eye on the possibility that any given conspiracy theory could turn out to be on the money.

    Lee Harvey Oswald is shot and killed by Jack Ruby in the basement of the Dallas City Hall, after Oswald was arrested for assassinating US president John F Kennedy.

    If the CIA were responsible for the assassinations of a number of world leaders, then why not also JFK? Wouldn’t that make it seem plausible the CIA could also be behind a plot to assassinate Donald Trump?

    Whether it’s true or not (and I don’t have a dog in this fight), it’s hard for anyone with a finger on the pulse of history to argue that it’s completely implausible. What divides those of us who extrapolate from these patterns from those of us who don’t is the trauma triad.

    Take that to mean that if you’ve never at least sympathised with a conspiracy theory, it could just be that you’ve led a pretty white picket fence life. You could stand to learn a little about how rough some folks have had it.

    And you could just be one shitty experience away from becoming a conspiracy theorist yourself.

     

    Canaries in the Conspiracy Coalmine

    While this is a treatise in defence of conspiracy theorists, it’s also fair to say that an orientation toward conspiracy beliefs is not without negative consequence.

    Historical trauma survivors and their descendants are at greater risk of mental ill health, including anxiety, depression, and PTSD, as well as issues with self-esteem and trust.

    The sense of powerlessness, victim mindset, and status degradation are not foregone conclusions of all historical trauma, however. It is possible for survivors to gain a sense of agency and feel empowered, liberated from their victim status. And unfounded beliefs in conspiracies tend to drop off as people become more empowered.

    This means it’s essential first to acknowledge and validate experiences of abuse, oppression, or deprivation. It’s only after this truth is spoken that reconciliation can begin and the traumatic rift between ingroup and outgroup can begin to heal.

    US president Joe Biden. (IMAGE: Gage Skidmore, Flickr)

    But you know what? It wouldn’t hurt if governments were more transparent and trustworthy, less corrupt and self-serving. And it wouldn’t hurt if the news consisted of more than just corporate-sponsored partisan punditry.

    Perhaps the assassination attempt on the former POTUS is an opportunity to reflect on why there are so many conspiracy theorists in our purportedly free democracies.

    Historic oppression. Economic inequality. Corrupt governance. And an election farce-off between a man you wouldn’t buy a used car from and a man who plays a demented president on TV. Or his female deputy.

    Tackling those issues would be an election platform for anyone serious about governing in the public interest.

    Perhaps the conspiracy circus is just a distraction from that notable omission.

    The post In Defence Of Conspiracy Theorists: It’s The Trauma, Stupid appeared first on New Matilda.

    This post was originally published on New Matilda.