When British migrants came to New Zealand during the 1830s, they had dreams of becoming settlers and starting a new life. However, problems began when conflict started between the settlers and the Natives over land disputes and transactions. This led to complains, and the British government was unwilling to act at first. Nevertheless, Britian realized this was its opportunity to take control over the Māori land and tighten control over British settlers. This also ensured that Britain could secure commercial interests and manage profits from New Zealand. To achieve these goals, Britain devised a plan to take sovereignty and control over New Zealand.
Overnight, Britian crafted a treaty and translated the English draft into Māori, and 500 Māori debated over the document before it was signed 2 days later. During this debate, British negotiators like William Hobson would exaggerate the benefits of the treaty, while downplaying effects of British control. This soothed the Māori people, but one major problem was missed. The translated versions of the Treaty differed, and there were important differences. The word “sovereignty” was translated to “kawantanga,” which meant governance. This led some Māori to misconceptions, and they believed that they were giving up government over lands but had rights to manage their own affairs. That was not the case, and the British would manage all their affairs and speak for them. Then, “undisturbed possession” of “properties” would later turn into “tino rangatiratanga” over “taonga,” meaning full authority over their treasures. This confused communication between the two, and some Māori did not understand the Treaty they were signing. Despite this, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed between the British Crown and 540 Māori chiefs on 1840.
Even after the Treaty’s ratification, there are still different understandings today. Many Māori claimed that interpreted terms of the treaty were not being “honored,” and some protested by marching onto Parliament. New studies of the Treaty in recent events have led to growing awareness of the Treaty, and studies over its meaning. These mixed feelings continue to guide legislation policies today, and Māori rights have been increased over time. Laws over time in New Zealand have progressively given Native citizens more and more privileges. However, not everyone was satisfied. Non-Natives began to argue that this discriminated against them, right after laws were changed to not discriminate against Natives. Dissatisfaction and controversy did not cease, and people argued over the extent of freedoms the Treaty of Waitangi granted.
Growing tensions eventually led to the conference on Thursday (Nov. 14). The New Zealand legislature held a proposal by the ACT New Zealand party, which was to create a bill containing a narrower interpretation of the Waitangi treaty. This would override the 184-year old-treaty, and possibly lessen Māori rights and progress. During the voting, Māori parliament member Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke decided to take matters into her own hands. She interrupted the voting, and stood up to perform a haka, which is a traditional Māori dance meant to demonstrate community and strength.
Although it started off as a battle chant during times of war to intimidate an opponent, it became a way for the Māori people to come together. They would make exaggerative movements and grunt, while beating their weapons to boost their own morale and gather hope. This fostered a sense of unity, and the free movements gave each participant the ability of self-expression. Now, hakas are performed before rugby games in New Zealand, and still used at important events. However, during the legislative voting, Clarke’s haka was a sign of solidarity and power. Although the Māori people could lose the growing power they’ve accumulated for 184 years, they would not go down without a fight.
As Clarke chanted a haka, she ripped up a copy of the bill. Then, members from her party joined in. This didn’t just include other Māori people, and it even included other parties and some of the public gallery. After the haka, Parliament was suspended since the shouting drowned out any other voices.
In response, ACT leader David Seymour claimed that anyone who opposed the bill only wanted to create fear and division. He claimed that he had only wanted to empower people. However, this was seen by Māori and its supporters as a direct attack to the rights of Natives, who make up 20% of the population. Although the voting was interrupted, this isn’t the end of rebellion. Advocates have planned out a hikoi, which will be a nine-day march in protest of the legislation. Rallies will be staged in towns and cities as protestors move from the north of the capital, to further south. The hikoi will begin next Tuesday on Nov. 19, where tens of thousands are expected to attend. However, due to traction on social media and rising popularity of the bill, the population could possibly rise.
Although you might not be part of a group, that doesn’t mean you can’t show your support and solidarity with them. This was shown when groups who weren’t even Māori stood up against the bill. When one group is affected, that means other groups could also be at risk. Time and time again throughout history, we have advocated for minorities and underrepresented groups. Even if it was performed in front of people who disagreed, the haka did its job through unification. The haka became another way for not just the Māori people, but for anyone who supported the rights of Natives to earn a sense of unity. It served as a battle chant, asserting that they were willing to fight for their rights.
Written by Claire Liu
