Connect with us

World

Why are New Zealand’s Maori protesting over colonial-era treaty bill?

Published

on

Why are New Zealand’s Maori protesting over colonial-era treaty bill?

A fight for Maori rights drew 42,000 protesters to the New Zealand Parliament in the capital Wellington on Tuesday.

A nine-day-long hikoi, or peaceful march – a tradition of the Maori – 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 colonisers and the Indigenous Maori people.

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

On November 14, the controversial Treaty Principles Bill was introduced in Parliament for a preliminary vote. Maori parliamentarians staged a haka (a Maori 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?

Advertisement
Thousands of marchers protesting government policies that affect the Māori cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge on day three of a nine-day journey to Wellington on November 13, 2024 in Auckland, New Zealand [Phil Walter/Getty Images]

Who are the Maori?

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

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

The two islands were originally called Aotearoa by the Maori. The name New Zealand was given to Aotearoa by British colonisers who took control under the treaty in 1840.

New Zealand became independent from the United Kingdom in 1947. However, this was after Maori people had suffered mass killings, land grabs and cultural erasure over more than 100 years at the hands of colonial settlers.

Advertisement

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

INTERACTIVE - New Zealand Indigenous Maori-1732000986
(Al Jazeera)

What was the Treaty of Waitangi?

On February 6, 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi, also called Te Tiriti o Waitangi or just Te Tiriti, was signed between the British Crown and around 500 Maori 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 Maori and the British, the English and te reo versions of the treaty actually feature some stark differences.

The te reo Maori version guarantees “rangatiratanga” to the Maori chiefs. This translates to “self-determination” and guarantees the Maori 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 Maori “full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries”.

Advertisement

“The English draft talks about the British settlers having full authority and control over Maori in the whole country,” Kassie Hartendorp, a Maori 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 Maori land was taken by the British Crown. Both versions of the treaty have been repeatedly breached and Maori 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.

Advertisement

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

What does the Treaty Principles Bill propose?

The Treaty Principles Bill was introduced by Member of Parliament David Seymour of the libertarian ACT Party, a minor partner in New Zealand’s coalition government. Seymour himself is Maori. 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 Maori and white New Zealanders have different political and legal rights. Seymour says that misinterpretations of the treaty’s meaning have effectively given Maori people special treatment. The bill calls for an end to “division by race”.

Advertisement

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 Maori 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 the Maori people because they have been historically oppressed.

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

Waitangi day
Maori warriors prepare to greet New Zealand government representatives including Prime Minister Christopher Luxon at Te Whare Runanga during a powhiri (welcoming ceremony) on February 5, 2024 in Waitangi, New Zealand. The Waitangi Day national holiday celebrates the signing of the treaty of Waitangi on February 6, 1840 by Maori chiefs and the British Crown [Fiona Goodall/Getty Images]

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”.

Advertisement

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.”

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.

Advertisement

Besides the six Maori Party seats, the New Zealand Parliament includes 34 seats held by the New Zealand 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 this week, Maori party lawmaker Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke tore up her copy of the legislation and led the haka ceremonial dance.

Is the bill likely to pass?

The chances of the bill becoming law are “zero”, Porter said.

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

Advertisement

“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 before. It comprises the National Party, ACT and New Zealand First.

While right-wing 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-Maori initiatives,” Porter said.

Advertisement

Many believe that the conservative coalition government, which took office in November 2023, has taken measures to remove “race-based politics”. The Maori 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.

Advertisement

World

English cops cuffed teen stabbing victim after attacker claimed racial assault

Published

on

English cops cuffed teen stabbing victim after attacker claimed racial assault

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

English police are facing mounting scrutiny after officers handcuffed an 18-year-old university student as he bled to death following a fatal stabbing, allegedly after believing the attacker’s false claim that he had been the victim of a racist assault.

The case has sparked outrage across Britain, fueled political debate over policing and prompted calls for the release of body-worn camera footage from the responding officers.

Alan Mendoza, executive director and co-founder of the London-based Henry Jackson Society think tank, told Fox News Digital that the case reflected broader failures in British policing culture. “The killing of Henry Nowak shows how far the rot of political correctness has set into the British policing mentality,” Mendoza said.

“The reflex attitude today appears to be to believe any and every claim that mentions racism,” he added. “It clearly trumped actual murder in this case as a dying Mr. Nowak was arrested on the say-so of his Sikh assailant without any facts being established by the officers attending.”

Advertisement

BRITISH POLICE RELEASE DETAILS ON SUSPECTS AFTER ‘SHOCKING’ TRAIN ATTACK, UPDATE ON VICTIMS

Freshman student Henry Nowak was stabbed many times by Vikram Digwa who used an eight inch  ceremonial knife in December 2025. Digwa was found guilty of murder last week.  (Hampshire police handout.)

Vickrum Digwa, 23, was convicted Thursday at Southampton Crown Court of murdering Henry Nowak, an 18-year-old finance student at the University of Southampton, during a confrontation on Dec. 3, 2025.

Officers arriving at the chaotic scene initially treated Nowak as the suspect after Digwa allegedly claimed he had been racially abused and attacked. Officers handcuffed Nowak before realizing the severity of his injuries. He later collapsed and died at the scene despite attempts to administer first aid, according to Sky News.

Following the verdict, Hampshire Constabulary publicly apologized and referred the case to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), England and Wales’ police watchdog, for investigation. “I’m sorry that he was handcuffed and arrested in the moments before he lost consciousness,” Temporary Deputy Chief Constable Robert France said in a statement reported by Sky News.

Advertisement

Prosecutors told jurors Digwa stabbed Nowak multiple times using a 21-centimeter blade described in court as a Sikh kirpan-style weapon. Digwa claimed he acted in self-defense after being racially abused, but jurors rejected that argument and found him guilty of murder.

The case has since ignited fierce public debate online and in British media over whether police prioritized allegations of racism over basic investigative and medical procedures.

TEXAS PRESS CONFERENCE IN AUSTIN METCALF KILLING DEVOLVES INTO CHAOS OVER TRACK MEET STABBING

Handout photo issued by Hampshire Police of Vickrum Digwa who has been found guilty at Southampton Crown Court of the murder of university student Henry Nowak, who he stabbed to death with a Sikh kirpan ceremonial knife. Digwa told police a “wicked lie” that he was the victim of a racist attack after he stabbed finance student Henry Nowak, from Chafford Hundred, Essex, five times in the incident in Belmont Road, Southampton, on Dec. 3 2025. Issue date: Thursday, May 28, 2026.  (Press Association via AP Images)

Speaking on GB News on Friday, Reform UK Member of Parliament Robert Jenrick called for the release of body-worn camera footage if the Nowak family consents.

Advertisement

“The officers chose to prioritize the accusation of racial abuse over saving the life of this young man,” Jenrick said. “I think that was a terrible mistake.”

Jenrick also criticized what he described as a muted response from Britain’s political establishment compared to reactions following the 2020 death of George Floyd in the United States.

“The Prime Minister says absolutely nothing. The Home Secretary says absolutely nothing.”

The killing has also raised concerns about hostility toward Britain’s Sikh community, which Sikh organizations have sought to distance from the crime.

In a public statement issued following the verdict, Sikh community organizations condemned the killing and stressed that the case should not be viewed as representative of Sikhism.

Advertisement

2 JEWISH MEN STABBED IN LONDON ATTACK CLASSIFIED AS TERRORISM

File of a police car in Derbyshire, England. (Derbyshire Constabulary via Facebook)

“Henry’s life has tragically been cut short by a moment of madness by an individual for which there can be no excuses,” the statement said.

The organizations also acknowledged that “the actions of police officers who handcuffed the victim just before he died” had intensified criticism of police and “unnecessarily stirred up community hatred.”

The statement further emphasized that legal protections allowing Sikhs in Britain to carry ceremonial kirpans for religious purposes do not apply if the blade is used violently.

Advertisement

“We understand in this case the weapon that may have been used was not the normal Kirpan worn by fully practicing Sikhs,” the statement read.

Mendoza stressed that Britain’s Sikh community broadly condemned the murder and supported the investigation.

“It’s legal for Sikhs to carry ceremonial knives in the U.K. but they are almost always tiny ones that religious authorities have ordained are sufficient to fulfil the obligation,” Mendoza told Fox News Digital. “He had one of those, plus his [8 inch] blade.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

A member of the London Met Police stands guard outside Westminster Abbey.  (BEN STANSALL/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

He also described Digwa as “a weapons nut,” referencing evidence presented during the trial that prosecutors said showed the defendant had a fascination with knives and weapons.

The IOPC investigation into the officers’ actions remains ongoing. Fox News Digital reached out to Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary for comment but did not receive a response before publication.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Japan rejects ‘new militarism’, says China is rapidly arming

Published

on

Japan rejects ‘new militarism’, says China is rapidly arming

Defence Minister Shinjiro Koizumi accuses China of lacking military transparency and stresses the importance of dialogue for regional stability.

Japanese Defence Minister Shinjiro Koizumi has dismissed claims that Tokyo is pursuing “new militarism” and accused China of rapidly expanding its military with limited transparency.

China continues to increase its defence spending at a high level, Koizumi said on Sunday at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“China’s external approach and military activities are matters of serious concern for ⁠Japan and the international community at the same time,” he added.

Advertisement

“Think about it. There’s a country that has a huge arsenal of nuclear weapons and strategic bombers. Japan has neither of such weapons, and yet Japan is labelled ‘new militarism’?”

Koizumi said Japan’s record since World War II “speaks for itself”, citing its adherence ‌to international law and commitment to the United Nations Charter alongside efforts to uphold a “free and open international order”.

In May, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs called on Asia Pacific countries to be vigilant and “jointly resist the reckless actions of Japan’s neo-militarism”.

At the Singapore forum, Chinese delegate Major General Meng Xiangqing criticised Japan.

“I deeply doubt whether a country that has not thoroughly eradicated the toxic legacy of militarism is qualified to talk extensively about defence cooperation on international occasions and whether it can win the trust of the international community, especially ⁠the Asian countries it once invaded,” he said.

Advertisement
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, speaks with Koizumi during the 23rd Shangri-La Dialogue on May 29, 2026 [Jam Sta Rosa/AFP]

Ties between Japan and China sank to ⁠their worst level in years after Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi warned in November that a hypothetical Chinese attack on Taiwan could draw a Japanese military response.

China claims Taiwan as its own territory over the objections of the island’s government.

Koizumi said transparency comes from “discussion and dialogue” and lamented that China had not sent its defence minister to the conference, but he insisted Japan remains open to engagement.

“We keep the door open,” he said, reaffirming Japan’s ⁠commitment to dialogue with China and other regional players to foster stability.

As China has been rapidly expanding and modernising its military, Japan has been reshaping its own defence policy. Last month, Takaichi’s cabinet scrapped a ban on lethal weapons exports, a major change in its post-war pacifist policy.

Advertisement

Japan pushes for unity

Separately on Sunday, Koizumi praised US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for his commitment to the Asia Pacific but at the same time stressed the continued need for strong coalitions globally.

“Division weakens deterrence. Unity strengthens deterrence,” he told the conference in Singapore.

“If gaps emerge among the United States, Europe and allies and like-minded countries, forces which take it as an opportunity will surely come in,” he said.

“We must prevent such a situation. We must keep our cooperation going on. Now is the time to make our cooperation even stronger.”

US President Donald Trump has been harsh about fellow members in NATO, and the comments at the Shangri-La conference came the day after Hegseth again chided Western European allies at the forum for not devoting enough resources to defence.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Video: W.H.O. Chief Visits Ebola-Struck Region: ‘It’s Time to Move Fast’

Published

on

Video: W.H.O. Chief Visits Ebola-Struck Region: ‘It’s Time to Move Fast’

new video loaded: W.H.O. Chief Visits Ebola-Struck Region: ‘It’s Time to Move Fast’

transcript

transcript

W.H.O. Chief Visits Ebola-Struck Region: ‘It’s Time to Move Fast’

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the World Health Organization, told The New York Times on a flight to the Democratic Republic of Congo that swift international support was necessary to contain the Ebola virus, which is spreading rapidly there.

“Of course there are different scenarios, but it’s in our hands. We move fast, we will catch up. If we don’t, it will be a very serious problem. So it’s time to really move fast.” A dire warning from the World Health Organization chief as we approach Ituri, the province at the center of Democratic Republic of Congo’s Ebola outbreak. More than 1,000 suspected Ebola cases and over 200 suspected deaths have been reported here. With no vaccines and no treatment for the virus species fueling the outbreak, containment is where immediate efforts should focus, health officials say. It’s not easy. Testing capacity is still very low. Protective supplies are short. Both the facilities for isolation and the region’s overall health care infrastructure are insufficient. “We cannot tell them what the problem is, Ebola is one but there are many problems and we have to listen to them.” It’s not the first Ebola outbreak for Congo, and as a glimmer of hope, officials say at least one health care worker was discharged earlier this week after recovering. But international commitments to fund their response aren’t enough. Only one-third of the needed funds have been delivered, the W.H.O. chief says. “Do you think the world is moving fast enough right now?” “It’s starting to understand now, but I still don’t think it’s enough.”

Advertisement
Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the World Health Organization, told The New York Times on a flight to the Democratic Republic of Congo that swift international support was necessary to contain the Ebola virus, which is spreading rapidly there.

By Bethlehem Feleke, Michael Anthony Adams and Alisa Shodiyev Kaff

May 30, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending