A rap on the knuckles

UN Special Rapporteur Rodolfo Stavenhagen has presented the second draft of his report into human rights and indigenous issues in New Zealand [PDF], and given the government a rap on the knuckles for its treatment of Maori - particularly over the Foreshore and Seabed Act. Stavenhagen critiques the Treaty settlements process, the lack of enforceable human rights protections for both Maori and Pakeha, and the Foreshore and Seabed Act - and finds them wanting. And he has a point. The Treaty Settlements process is one-sided and effectively coerced, and would be vastly improved (from a justice standpoint) by having the Waitangi Tribunal or some other independent judicial body able to make binding recommendations rather than merely being able to advise. The inability to enforce the Treaty through the courts has made it easy for the government to systematically disposes and oppress Maori, and constitutionalisation in an appropriate form would help prevent such abuse in the future. Our existing human rights legislation is fundamentally compromised by the government's ability to overrule it on a whim. And the Foreshore and Seabed Act did discriminate against Maori, by actively expropriating any remaining customary title, stacking the legal deck comprehensively against them, and ensuring that their ability to see their rights recognised depended not on the strength of their case, but on the grace and favour of the crown. The Special Rapporteur is entirely right to recommend that these problems be corrected.

As for the government's response to this, it is frankly pathetic, running from petty nitpicking of the style more commonly seen on a sewerblog, to pure nationalist chest-beating:

[Stavenhagen's] raft of recommendations is an attempt to tell us how to manage our political system. This may be fine in countries without a proud democratic tradition, but not in New Zealand where we prefer to debate and find solutions to these issues ourselves.

Frankly this is the sort of bullshit I expect from the Americans - or the National Party - not a government which prides itself on its commitment to being a "good international citizen". These UN bodies do not exist just to kick around poor countries and those with shitty governments - they exist to ensure that nations with a "proud democratic tradition" remain committed to their core values - something the Americans have failed to do with Guantanamo, and something we have arguably failed to do with our passage of the Foreshore and Seabed Act. If the government no longer wishes to support those values, then it is of course entitled to say so - but to publicly proclaim adherence and "good international citizenship" while rejecting independent oversight by international bodies is simply rank hypocrisy.