Maori Party Co-leader disgusted at claim against Kingitanga
Maori Party Co-leader Dr Pita Sharples has questioned the substance of a Treaty claim against the legitimacy of the Kingitanga.
“This challenge to the legitimacy of the Kingitanga is both ill-informed and mischievous,” said Dr Sharples. “The history and traditions of the Kingitanga are firmly rooted in Mana Maori Motuhake and tino rangatiratanga, and the Kingitanga in no way undermines the independence of any other iwi,” he said.
“Originally the Kingitanga was established to secure rangatiratanga through kotahitanga or unity among the tribes. It was a pan-tribal political movement, and Potatau Te Wherowhero of Waikato was eventually selected as the first King by consensus. Succession passes down through his family, also by consensus. The mandate of the Kingitanga is based on allegiance that is freely given by iwi, based on their informed consent and what is in their best interests.
“At Dame Te Atairangikahu’s tangihanga, iwi leaders from throughout the motu were invited by the Tainui elders to review how the King is selected. The consensus was to leave it to Tainui, and that Ngaruawahia should remain the seat of the Kingitanga.
“Waikato Tainui chose Tuheitia. This decision was then proposed orally three times to the multitude gathered on the marae. Three times the late Dr Tui Adams asked: “Ko Tuheitia hei Kingi?” Should Tuheitia be King? and three times the people present assented: “Ae” – Yes!
“Any tribe is free not to participate in this process, and not to acknowledge the mana of the Kingitanga, in which case it is none of their business.
“Because the authority of the Kingitanga is not imposed, it would be hard to argue that anyone is prejudiced by the existence of the Kingitanga, and I would be surprised if David Rankin’s claim meets the requirements of the Treaty of Waitangi Act.
“This is another footnote in a history of attention-seeking behaviour by Mr Rankin, and I suspect it might be driven by envy rather than Treaty principle,” said Dr Sharples.