He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni 1835

He Wakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni 1835

Declaration of Independence of New Zealand

1. We, the hereditary chiefs and heads of the tribes of the Northern parts of New Zealand, being assembled at Waitangi, in the Bay of Islands, on this 28th day of October, 1835, declare the Independence of our country, which is hereby constituted and declared to be an Independent State, under the designation of The United Tribes of New Zealand.

2. All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, unless by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled.

3. The hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the autumn of each year, for the purpose of framing laws for the dispensation of justice, the preservation of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and they cordially invite the Southern tribes to lay aside their private animosities and to consult the safety and welfare of our common country, by joining the Confederation of the United Tribes.

4. They also agree to send a copy of this Declaration to His Majesty the King of England, to thank him for his acknowledgment of their flag; and in return for the friendship and protection they have shown, and are prepared to show, to such of his subjects as have settled in their country, or resorted to its shores for the purposes of trade, they entreat that he will continue to be the parent of their infant State, and that he will become its Protector from all attempts upon its independence.

5. Agreed to unanimously on this 28th day of October, 1835, in the presence of His Britannic Majesty’s Resident.

(Here follow the signatures or marks of thirty-five Hereditary Chiefs or Heads of Tribes, which form a fair representation of the tribes of New Zealand from the North Cape to the latitude of the River Thames.)

Click here to show the full list of signatories

The Declaration of Independence of New Zealand (He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni) was signed by a number of Māori chiefs, primarily from the northern regions of New Zealand. The document was initially signed by 34 chiefs on 28 October 1835, with additional signatures added later, bringing the total to over 50. Below is a list of the known signatories, organized by iwi (tribe) and region:

Ngāpuhi Chiefs (Northern Iwi):

1. Hōne Heke Pokai (Hōne Heke) – A prominent Ngāpuhi chief and later a key figure in the Flagstaff War.

1. Tāmati Wāka Nene – A influential Ngāpuhi leader who supported the Treaty of Waitangi.

1. Pōmare I – A chief of the Ngāti Manu hapū.

1. Te Wharerahi – A senior Ngāpuhi chief.

1. Rewa – A Ngāpuhi leader from the Kerikeri area.

1. Moka Te Kainga-mataa – A chief from the Bay of Islands.

1. Tītore – A Ngāpuhi leader involved in early interactions with Europeans.

1. Patuone – Brother of Tāmati Wāka Nene and a respected Ngāpuhi chief.

1. Kawiti – A Ngāpuhi chief who later fought in the Flagstaff War.

1. Pana-kareao – A chief from the far north.

1. Hāre Hongi Hika – A Ngāpuhi leader and relative of Hongi Hika.

1. Te Morenga – A chief from the Bay of Islands.

1. Matangi – A Ngāpuhi leader.

1. Marupō – A Ngāpuhi chief.

1. Tāreha – A Ngāpuhi leader.

1. Te Kēmara – A chief who later spoke at the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.

1. Heke Hōtere – A Ngāpuhi leader.

1. Te Hira – A Ngāpuhi chief.

1. Te Kaha – A Ngāpuhi leader.

1. Te Tirarau Kūkupa – A chief from the Kaipara region.

Other Northern Iwi Chiefs:

1. Te Wherowhero – A Waikato chief who later became the first Māori King (Potatau Te Wherowhero).

1. Te Hāpuku – A Ngāti Kahungunu chief from Hawke’s Bay.

1. Te Māwae – A chief from the Hokianga region.

1. Te Pūnahu – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Whareraunga – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Tāwai – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Ruki Kawiti – A Ngāpuhi chief and leader in the Flagstaff War.

1. Te Tirarau – A chief from the Kaipara region.

1. Te Hiamoe – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Kēpa – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Paki – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Pae-o-te-Rangi – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Tāwha – A chief from the Hokianga.

1. Te Whareumu – A chief from the Bay of Islands.

Additional Signatories (Later Signatures):

Over time, more chiefs added their signatures to the declaration. While the full list of later signatories is not always documented, some notable names include:

- Te Wherowhero (later the first Māori King).

- Te Hāpuku (Ngāti Kahungunu).

- Te Māwae (Hokianga).

- Te Pūnahu (Hokianga).

Notes:

- The signatories were primarily from the Ngāpuhi iwi and other northern tribes, as the declaration was drafted and signed in the Bay of Islands and Hokianga regions.

- Some chiefs, like Te Wherowhero and Te Hāpuku, were from more distant regions and signed later, showing the growing influence of the declaration.

- The document was written in both Māori and English, and the signatures were collected over several months.

English witnesses:

- (Signed) Henry Williams, Missionary, C.M.S.

- (Signed) George Clarke, C.M.S.

- (Signed) James C. Clendon, Merchant.

- (Signed) Gilbert Mair, Merchant.

The Declaration of Independence of New Zealand (He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni) was gazetted on 2 November 1835 in the New South Wales Government Gazette.

At the time, New Zealand was not yet a British colony, and administrative matters related to New Zealand were often handled through the colonial government of New South Wales, Australia.

Details of the Gazette Notice:

- Date of Publication: 2 November 1835.

- Publication: New South Wales Government Gazette.

- Purpose: The notice was published to formally announce the signing of the Declaration of Independence and to inform the British government and the public of the establishment of the United Tribes of New Zealand as a sovereign entity.

Significance of the Gazette Notice:

The publication of the Declaration of Independence in the New South Wales Government Gazette was an important step in formalizing the document’s status. It signaled to the British government and other colonial powers that the Maori chiefs had united under the United Tribes of New Zealand and were asserting their sovereignty over the land.

Referred to by British Resident James Busby as the ‘Magna Carta of New Zealand Independence,’ He Whakaputanga stands as a courageous and groundbreaking assertion of Indigenous authority.

It is the founding document from which Te Tiriti was formed. As Ngāpuhi elder Hone Sadler explains, ‘He Whakaputanga te matua, Te Tiriti te tamaiti — He Whakaputanga is the parent, Te Tiriti is the child.’

He Whakaputanga is New Zealand’s first and only lasting ‘constitutional document’—a text that outlines the foundation of the nation, its governance, and its leadership. It also marks one of the earliest expressions of Maori identity as a collective, extending beyond individual iwi and hapū. In fact, He Whakaputanga invites, in article the 3rd, all ‘Southern tribes’ to join the Confederation, which is an open invitation extending to all people living in Aotearoa then, and even now. This means it is not exclusive to ‘Maori’ people but to all people. The term ‘Maori’ was not even used at this point, not until 1840 in Te Tiriti was that term used to describe the indigenous of Aotearoa.

The hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the autumn of each year, for the purpose of framing laws for the dispensation of justice, the preservation of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and they cordially invite the Southern tribes to lay aside their private animosities and to consult the safety and welfare of our common country, by joining the Confederation of the United Tribes.

The term ‘whakaputanga’ is commonly translated as ‘declaration,’ but it can also signify ‘emergence’—the emergence of a new nation. The phrase used in the document to describe an independent state, “he whenua rangatira,” carries a profound meaning of a land at peace, governed by its rightful leaders.

The English translation of He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand) provides insight into the intentions and aspirations of the Maori chiefs who signed it in 1835. Below is the translated text of the declaration:

Key Points of the Translation:

1. Sovereignty: The declaration asserts the independence of New Zealand as a sovereign state under the name “The United Tribes of New Zealand.”

1. Authority: It states that all sovereign power resides in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes collectively.

1. Governance: The chiefs agree to meet annually in Congress to create laws, maintain peace, and regulate trade.

1. Relationship with Britain: The declaration acknowledges the British Crown’s recognition of the Maori flag and seeks continued friendship and protection from King William IV.

1. Unity: It calls for other tribes to join the confederation for the safety and welfare of the country.

Significance of the Translation:

The English translation of He Whakaputanga highlights the Maori chiefs’ desire to assert their sovereignty and self-governance while maintaining a diplomatic relationship with Britain. It is a foundational document in New Zealand’s history, laying the groundwork for the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 and reflecting the early efforts of Maori to establish a unified and independent nation.

The Declaration of Independence remains a significant document in New Zealand’s history, and the signatories are remembered as leaders who asserted Maori sovereignty and self-determination.

Indigenous version of He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti rules:

The principle that the indigenous version of a contract or treaty is the most powerful or correct is rooted in international law, treaty interpretation principles, and indigenous rights frameworks. Below are the key sources and contexts where this principle is articulated or implied:

1. Treaty Interpretation Principles

- Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969):
  Article 31 of the Vienna Convention states that treaties must be interpreted “in good faith” and in light of their context, object, and purpose. When a treaty exists in multiple languages (e.g., indigenous and colonial versions), the version that aligns most closely with the intent of the parties—particularly the indigenous party—is often given greater weight, especially if the indigenous version was the one understood and agreed to by the indigenous signatories.

- Contra Proferentem Rule:
  In contract law, this rule states that any ambiguity in a contract should be interpreted against the party who drafted it. In the context of treaties between indigenous peoples and colonial powers, this often means favoring the indigenous interpretation, as the colonial power typically drafted the treaty.

2. Indigenous Rights Frameworks

- United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP, 2007):
  Article 37 of UNDRIP states:

“Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance, and enforcement of treaties, agreements, and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements, and other constructive arrangements.”

This implies that the indigenous understanding of treaties must be respected and upheld, as they reflect the intent and rights of indigenous peoples.

- Indigenous Legal Traditions:
  Many indigenous legal systems prioritize oral agreements, cultural context, and spiritual significance over written texts. These traditions emphasize that the indigenous version of a treaty or agreement is the most authentic and authoritative.

3. Case Law and Historical Examples

- Treaty of Waitangi (1840) – New Zealand:
  The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in both Maori and English versions, with significant differences in meaning. Over time, New Zealand courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have recognized that the Maori text (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) is the definitive version in many cases, as it reflects the understanding and intent of the Maori signatories. This principle is now a cornerstone of New Zealand’s legal framework for addressing historical grievances.

- Johnson v. M’Intosh (1823) – United States:
  While this case is controversial and rooted in colonial ideology, it acknowledges that indigenous peoples had their own systems of land ownership and governance. Modern interpretations of such cases often emphasize the need to prioritize indigenous perspectives in treaty interpretation.

4. Scholarly and Legal Commentary

- Indigenous Legal Scholars:
  Scholars such as John Borrows (Anishinaabe) and Robert A. Williams Jr. (Lumbee) argue that indigenous legal traditions and interpretations must be central to understanding treaties. They emphasize that colonial versions of treaties often misrepresent or undermine indigenous understandings.

- Truth and Reconciliation Processes:
  In countries like Canada and Australia, truth and reconciliation commissions have highlighted the importance of honoring the indigenous versions of treaties and agreements as part of addressing historical injustices.

Why the Indigenous Version is Considered Most Powerful/Correct:

1. Intent of the Parties: The indigenous version often reflects the true intent and understanding of the indigenous signatories, who may not have been fully informed or consulted about the colonial version.

1. Power Imbalance: Colonial powers often held disproportionate power in treaty negotiations, making the indigenous version a critical counterbalance to potential exploitation or misrepresentation.

1. Cultural Context: Indigenous versions of treaties often include cultural, spiritual, and communal dimensions that are absent in colonial texts.

Summary:

The principle that the indigenous version of a treaty or contract is the most powerful or correct is supported by international law, treaty interpretation principles, and indigenous rights frameworks. It reflects a growing recognition of the need to honor indigenous perspectives and rectify historical injustices. If you’re exploring specific treaties (e.g., Treaty of Waitangi, North American treaties), the indigenous versions are increasingly being prioritized in legal and historical analyses.