Should there be one law for all or should there be a parallel legal system for Maori?
Before any of these acts are put into place, there should be a full understanding of both statements, what both the pros and cons are if this act is put into place and then how it would affect New Zealand. Not only Maori but also our other different ethnicities.
What is law?
Before any of these acts are put into place, there should be a full understanding of both statements, what both the pros and cons are if this act is put into place and then how it would affect New Zealand. Not only Maori but also our other different ethnicities.
What is law?
What does one law for all mean?
One Law for All has now been adopted as slogan for an anti-racist, anti-apartheid movement, which campaigns for equal rights and equal legal protection for all citizens regardless of gender or age.
When the analysis of law is founded in the belief that 'one law for all' means 'one process for all' rather than 'one resultant justice for all', the debate becomes confined by monocultural strangulation - Wikipedia
What does parallel legal system for Maori mean?
A "common law system" is a legal system that gives great precedential weight to common law, on the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions. The body of precedent is called "common law" and it binds future decisions. - Wikipedia
“Criminal law in this country is the product of values distilled from
British and Western history, so it reflects notions of individual rather than collective liability. Maori cultural values are simply not reflected in our criminal law.”
What is New Zealand’s current legal system?
The law of New Zealand can be found in several sources. The primary sources of New Zealand law are statutes enacted by the New Zealand Parliament and decisions of the New Zealand Courts. At a more fundamental level, the law of New Zealand is based on three related principles: parliamentary sovereignty; the rule of law; and the separation of powers. As a former British colony, the New Zealand legal system is heavily based on the English legal system, and remains similar in many respects. There are also important differences, which reflect the unique legal culture that has developed in New Zealand.
There are Pros and Cons for both the arguments of whether there should be one law for all or if there should be a parallel legal system for Maori. Through conducted studies there have been various reasons for both for and against with both statements, and no matter which law is put into place there will always be both a negative and positive out come.
One Law for All:
Pros:
· with the one law for all ethnicities, nobody would be judged on the basis of their cultural background.
· all equally punished according to the crime committed.
· Pakeha criminal law and its processes of enforcement, are seen to represent the community’s desire for peace, good order and protection of harm.
Cons:
· Doesn’t take into consideration religion: (Cultural Defence)
e.g. one man’s culture/religion would kidnap girls and have sexual intercourse with them, and when they would say no , it meant yes. He used his culture/ and religion in his defence.
e.g. one man’s culture/religion would kidnap girls and have sexual intercourse with them, and when they would say no , it meant yes. He used his culture/ and religion in his defence.
· Cultural Bias
· In having the one legal system in store the outcome rarely leads to real justice for the victim.
2 legal systems (one for Maori, one for everyone else)
Pros:
· The current Justice System clearly isn’t working; perhaps the Maori Version should be given a chance.
· The law embodies and protects cultural values. One law for all stacks up well from a monocultural Pakeha point of view. It is not convincing from a Maori point of view because law is never culturally neutral. All law embodies and protects a particular culture's values. http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/maori_justice.html
Cons:
· Double standarded
No matter which act is chosen, the main factor would be that justice is seen.Justice is a very simple and natural idea. It is something anyone can recognise. Victims of crime recognise justice when it is done. Ordinary people recognise when it is done. And most of the time, an offender will recognise it too.
But, people will strongly recognise when justice has not taken place.
People of our society would like to see that justice has taken place , but because we use our modern, Westminster style legal system , this system is not based on justice.
For example. If somebody was stabbed, the problem, according to the justice system, is not that the person was hurt or seriously injured even causing death, but would be that the offender had broken the law. ‘The Crown’ is the complaint, the victim is just another witness, and if the offender can prove that he/ or she didn’t technically break the law, they are likely to go unpunished. There will be and injured victim and a free criminal therefore with no real justice taking place.
This is not real justice because modern courts cases are aimed at proving guilt or innocence according to a written set of laws, rather than finding the truth of the matter. It is a system that is unsatisfying for victims and that does not even prevent criminals from reoffending. It is a system without life, without punishment and with freedom majority of the time.
There are clear alternatives to such a system. Some years ago, a lawyer here in New Zealand, Moana Jackson, wrote a report entitled Maori and the Criminal Justice System calling for a parallel Maori justice system. It was widely condemned by the Government and the media. Ministers were quick to scoff, in mock outrage, that there could not possibly be one law for the Maoris and one for the Pakeha (who are New Zealanders of European descent).
Of course, the Government had reason to be worried. Community control is a subversive idea. It undermines the legal fiction that the Crown is the sole sovereign power. When Moana Jackson wrote his report, sovereignty was exactly what he was talking about. But it was Maori sovereignty - the right of the Maori people to choose their own path.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2465/is_4_30/ai_63699783/
Perhaps the parallel legal system should be given a chance for people of the Maori, because it seems that the system put in place today is not seeing justice and is clearly not working.http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2465/is_4_30/ai_63699783/
Did Maori have their own system of law and justice?
“Thousands of years ago Maori had their own criminal justice system operating in Aotearoa. This pre-european institution was based on social responsibilities that linked people to their wider community.
Actions that were unacceptable were well understood and taken into consideration. A method for dealing with offenders was in place.
Criminal law with penalties aimed at constraining would-be offenders, developed to preserve harmony within and among individuals and their community
Maori did once have their own valid system that worked and tikanga was used and made applicable to the situation. For example to break a law whilst a Maori justice system was put in place would be tapu (sacred) and enforcable act would take place. Dependant on the situtation. If a murder or rape had taken place the becoming a more serious offence, the penalty would be more serious particularly where death would be involved.” – Towards a Maori Criminal Justice System
Among a number of proposals was that for a parallel criminal justice system for Maori. It met with a negative response from then Minister of Justice, Geffory Palmer, and received little further public attention until September 1993, when the matter of marae trials for Maori child sexual abusers was highlighted. – Towards a Maori Criminal Justice System
Government are clearly worried about bringing into place a parallel legal system for Maori because our communities are taking control in groups to retain the justice within New Zealand. Government are lacking in few areas and felt threatened by the fact that the people were speaking up and out to keep a better and more safe and secure society and environment for our future generations.
Looking at both European and Maori perspectives of this topic and whether it should be made as one law for all , or whether there should be a parallel legal system for Maori.
From a Maori point of view the present criminal justice system of one law judicial process for all in not just culturally insensitive, but also culturally arrogant. It has no place for the acceptance of Maori ideals and practices.
When decisions are made in courts, majority of the jury are European. Maori should be heard and given a chance to be judged by people who have the same up bringings, cultural undertandings , language and protocol. With there being no Maori juries, the procedures put in place are denying Maori any real justice.
Moana Jackson believes that it is unfair that Maori cannot be heard by an all Maori jury, when Pakeha (or european) offenders are often tried by all Pakeha juries and never by all Maori Jurors.
Maori do not benefit from discretionary powers avaliable in the judicial process to nearly the same extent as Pakeha or European.
If the parallel legal system was put into place, Maori would gain a chance to be more likely heard and judged by people of the same ethnicity and cultural heritage.
Times have very much changed and different forms of action and persecutions would be taken for cases today, but to open the doors for our people to have a little more independance and protection.
Government are clearly worried about bringing into place a parallel legal system for Maori because our communities are taking control in groups to retain the justice within New Zealand. Government are lacking in few areas and felt threatened by the fact that the people were speaking up and out to keep a better and more safe and secure society and environment for our future generations.
Looking at both European and Maori perspectives of this topic and whether it should be made as one law for all , or whether there should be a parallel legal system for Maori.
From a Maori point of view the present criminal justice system of one law judicial process for all in not just culturally insensitive, but also culturally arrogant. It has no place for the acceptance of Maori ideals and practices.
When decisions are made in courts, majority of the jury are European. Maori should be heard and given a chance to be judged by people who have the same up bringings, cultural undertandings , language and protocol. With there being no Maori juries, the procedures put in place are denying Maori any real justice.
Moana Jackson believes that it is unfair that Maori cannot be heard by an all Maori jury, when Pakeha (or european) offenders are often tried by all Pakeha juries and never by all Maori Jurors.
Maori do not benefit from discretionary powers avaliable in the judicial process to nearly the same extent as Pakeha or European.
If the parallel legal system was put into place, Maori would gain a chance to be more likely heard and judged by people of the same ethnicity and cultural heritage.
Times have very much changed and different forms of action and persecutions would be taken for cases today, but to open the doors for our people to have a little more independance and protection.
With the signing of the Treaty statements were made , yet none were fully understood unto both parties.
When the Maori text of the Treaty was translated into English, the meaning and intention of the Maori version was interpreted differently causing misunderstandings and confusion between Maori and European. Maori wanted to retain Tino Rangatiratanga and in return they understood that it was necessary for the Crown to control British subjects and to protect Maori from Pakeha ursurpation.
This lack of understanding since the Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 has continued to this day. The Crown has continued to maintain to this day that Maori gave up their sovereignty when they signed article one of the English version of the Treaty.
In order for the Government to grant Maori their own parallel criminal justice system, they would need to have a full understanding of the Maori text of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Conclusion
Maori should be given that right and chance to have an active parallel legal system. They should hold significant independant jurisdiction. Other indigenous cultures world wide such as Native American, Navaho System etc have their justice systems put into place . But if a more serious crime were to occur, this would then be tried by the countries mainstream judicial system.
