DOCUMENT: hawaiind.txt This document has been submitted by: Kekula P. Bray-Crawford Executive Assistant to the Head of State Advisor on Foreign Affairs Independent Nation State of Hawaii Puuhonua O Waimanalo Post Office Box 80 Waimanalo, Oahu, Hawaii hawaii.nation@tdp.org Phone: (808) 259-5049 FAX: (808) 259-9542 THE RIGHT TO HAWAIIAN INDEPENDENCE VS. NATION WITHIN A NATION On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed Public Law 103-150, acknowledging the United States' role in the illegal overthrow of Hawai'i in 1893, apologizing to the Native Hawaiian people, and recognizing their "inherent sovereignty" and right of self-determination. On December 28, 1993, international law Professor Francis Anthony Boyle, expert on human rights and self- determination, gave his expert legal opinion on the implications of the US Public Law for the restoration of Hawaiian independence. In his testimony, he stated: "The United States government has now officially conceded that it illegally invaded and occupied the Kingdom of Hawai'i, and for this reason the native people of Hawai'i would be entitled to a restoration of their independent status as a sovereign nation state..." Prof. Boyle also said that "...what I am suggesting is that you not ask the permission of the United States Congress to declare independence, but rather you exercise your right of self-determination, that has been afforded to you, the Hawaiian people, by the United Nations Charter, in particularly Article 1, paragraph 2..." On January 16, 1994, the Kanaka Maoli issued a Proclamation Restoring the Independence of the Sovereign Nation-State of Hawai'i, and have proceeded with the necessary measures under international law to restore Hawaiian independence. However, there is an effort on the part of some to limit rightful Hawaiian sovereignty to a Nation-within-a-Nation status similar to Native Americans. PROF. BOYLE'S TESTIMONY: DISTINCT LEGAL STATUS OF KANAKA MAOLI Professor Boyle's testimony on US Public Law 103-150 includes the following passage indicating the differences between the rights and status of Kanaka Maoli from Native Americans. "...You're in a very different situation here from Native Americans, because now Congress has conceded what they will not concede for the Native Americans -that you had a state, that it was a state just like any other state in existence at that time - just like the United States of America - and was entitled to as much respect and dignity. And Congress has now conceded this point. That's why when I read in the newspaper on Monday about this visit by the Secretary of the Interior Babbitt, and his question, "Should Native Hawaiians become treated by the federal government like the Native Americans?" And my response to reading that is, Why would you want to do that? ...Native Americans are up against genocide and extermination. That's the policy of the federal government, with respect to Native Americans. So I don't understand why Native Hawaiians would want to buy into a system and be treated in the system in a way that ultimately would lead to your extermination. And that's certainly the way large numbers of Native Americans see it. ...So whatever you do, I would certainly caution you against trying to seek the same type of treatment that the federal government has doled out to the Native Americans, because we know where that will lead. Moreover, on the basis of this statute, you're entitled to a lot more that what they give the Native Americans. ... Legally, you're in a much different, much better situation than Native Americans. TREATY LAW, PAST VIOLATIONS US Senator Daniel Inouye (Chair of the Indian Affairs Committee), during the Senate Hearings for Public Law 103- 150, stated that the government of the United States has entered into 800 treaties with Indian Nations. However, 430 of these treaties were never considered by Congress, and of the 370 that were considered and ratified, the United States "violated provisions in every one of them." (Congressional Record, Vol. 139, No. 147, S14880, 103d Congress, First Session, Wednesday, October 27, 1993) The United States also violated five treaties with the Native Hawaiian government when they overthrew it in 1893. At that time, however, Hawai'i had treaties with dozens of other nations as well, and was recognized internationally as an independent nation state, unlike the American Indian Nations. This unique historical relationship has been recognized in US Public Law 103-150, and must be honored today, respecting the distinct status and rights of the Kanaka Maoli. While Native Hawaiians express solidarity with Native Americans and support their efforts to develop beneficial relations with the United States as they deem fit, the Kanaka Maoli wish to deal with the United States not as part of a group, but on their own, according to their unique history and legal status. FEDERAL POLICE POWERS, DEFEASANCE OF LAND RIGHTS The Supreme Court has held that the national government has the inherent right to regulate Indian affairs. The Supreme Court has declared that "all aspects of Indian sovereignty are subject to defeasance by Congress." (Escondido Mutual Water Co. v. La Jolla, Rincon, San Pasqual, Pauma, and Pala Bands of Mission Indians, 466 U.S. 765, 104 S.Ct. 2105, 2118, 80 L.Ed. 753 (1984), rehearing denied 467 U.S. 1267, 104 S.Ct. 3562, 82 L.Ed. 864 (1984)) Admittedly, the United States carries a heavy fiduciary responsibility to the various Indian tribes. However, note that the United States has interpreted any obligation to American Indians to their aboriginal lands to be satisfied upon "payment." Thus "payment" under the Indian Claims Commission Act for loss of aboriginal land occurred when the funds awarded for the loss are placed into an account in the Treasury for the Tribe; this payment terminates tribal aboriginal rights to the land. (United States v. Dann, 470 U.S. 39, 105 S.Ct. 1058, 84 L.Ed.2d. 28 (1985)) U.S. Public Law 103-150 specifically states that the "Native Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States..." Any action which would lead to the denial of their unextinguished sovereign rights to their national lands, including nation-within-a- nation/reservation status, is unequivocally unacceptable to the Kanaka Maoli. Justice will only be done with full restoration of sovereignty and independence for Hawaii. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: -= THE FOURTH WORLD DOCUMENTATION PROJECT =- :: :: A service provided by :: :: The Center For World Indigenous Studies :: :: www.cwis.org :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Originating at the Center for World Indigenous Studies, Olympia, Washington USA www.cwis.org © 1999 Center for World Indigenous Studies (All Rights Reserved. References up to 500 words must be referenced to the Center for World Indigenous Studies and/or the Author Copyright Policy Material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive is accepted on the basis that the material is the original, unoccupied work of the author or authors. Authors agree to indemnify the Center for World Indigenous Studies, and DayKeeper Press for all damages, fines and costs associated with a finding of copyright infringement by the author or by the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive in disseminating the author(s) material. In almost all cases material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive will attract copyright protection under the laws of the United States of America and the laws of countries which are member states of the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention or have bi-lateral copyright agreements with the United States of America. Ownership of such copyright will vest by operation of law in the authors and/or The Center for World Indigenous Studies, Fourth World Journal or DayKeeper Press. The Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and its authors grant a license to those accessing the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive to render copyright materials on their computer screens and to print out a single copy for their personal non-commercial use subject to proper attribution of the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and/or the authors. Questions may be referred to: Director of Research Center for World Indigenous Studies PMB 214 1001 Cooper Point RD SW Suite 140 Olympia, Washington 98502-1107 USA 360-754-1990 www.cwis.org usaoffice@cwis.org OCR Software provided by Caere Corporation