Te Mana o Ngā Maunga, Te Mana o Ngā Kāhui

Words by Tessa Keenan (she/her; Te Ātiawa)

Ko Tupua kawa, ko Tawhito kawa, ko Te Matoe o te rangi, tēnei hoki rā te taketake rongo, he taketake maunga, he taketake tangata, tēnei ka hora.

My maunga is my oldest tūpuna. My maunga stands tall and protects my whanaunga, and in turn, we have a responsibility to protect him. My maunga loves and fights for what is right. My maunga lives on in me, and I will live on in him. The mauri and mana of my maunga are  inseparable from me. 

For many, Taranaki Maunga is a pretty picture of clean, green, beautiful, touristy Aotearoa. He’s on corporate calendars and postcards—peep overdone Pouākai Tarns reflection shots. Add what is (still) called the Egmont National Park, and you’ve got an attractive ring of bush and alpine glory  people who love the outdoors will travel many kilometres to see.

For ngā uri o Taranaki Maunga — ngā uri o Taranaki Iwi, Te Ātiawa, Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi, Ngāruahine, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Mutunga, Ngāti Ruanui, and Ngāti Tama — that pretty picture is a lifeline. He’s the reason we are who we are. The trees, plants, birds, and freshwater that have sustained our people for generations are the children of Taranaki and Pouākai (the maunga next door). Without our awa, there are no fish to eat. Without our manu, there are no korowai to protect us. Taranaki Maunga is also the gateway to our atua, the place where we can access the metaphysical realm that keeps us connected to who we are. 

Soon, our maunga will be a legal person. 

Over the last ten years, Treaty of Waitangi settlements between the Crown and iwi representatives have seen the creation of Pākehā legal mechanisms to give legal personhood rights to some maunga, awa, and whenua. Te Urewera, the heartland of Ngāi Tūhoe, was granted legal personhood in 2014, and then Whanganui River, followed in the 2017 Te Awa Tupua arrangement. 

Next up, Taranaki Maunga. 

Legal personhood gives our tūpuna real legal power in the Pākehā legal arena. Whilst they can’t do all the things most humans can do in law, like get married, legal persons can own assets, participate in legal proceedings, make submissions on resource consents, and much more.

To give you the Taranaki Maunga context, a Collective Deed of Redress (called Te Ruruku Pūtakerongo) between the Crown and all eight iwi o Taranaki will make provision for Taranaki Maunga and all maunga located in the current Egmont National Park to be one legal person. They will be known as Te Kāhui Tupua. 

Te Ruruku Pūtakerongo is founded in a framework called He Kawa Tupua, which is based on whakapapa and the natural hierarchy of the maunga as tūpuna. “Effectively, what we say is ‘the maunga first and foremost’,” said negotiator Jamie Tuuta (Ngāti Mutunga, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Maru, Te Ātiawa, Taranaki Tūturu) at an information hui on 17 July. “The broader arrangements are about the health and well-being of the maunga.” 

There are two aspects to He Kawa Tupua. First, Te Mana o Ngā Maunga recognises  all Taranaki maunga have legal person status, embeds a set of intrinsic values around the arrangement, establishes Te Tōpuni Kōkōrangi (the human face and voice of Te Kāhui Tupua), and includes other changes that affect the well-being of the maunga. Secondly, Te Mana o Te Kāhui is grounded in the connections human uri of the maunga have with them. This part of the deed acknowledges a collective statement of iwi relationship to the maunga, establishes a collective entity for ngā iwi o Taranaki, and outlines how the national park (to be renamed Te Papa-Kura-o-Taranaki) will be managed.

The length of Te Ruruku Pūtakerongo matches up with the importance of the arrangement for our people, future ngā iwi o Taranaki relationships, and the battles that were fought by our tūpuna to get where we are today. 

Staying in the Taranaki Maunga context, flash back (at your own risk) to when the Crown stole Taranaki Maunga and other maunga in 1865 — as well as almost all whenua in the Taranaki region. Then, flash forward to 1978, when the Taranaki Māori Trust Board were given back Taranaki Maunga, on the premise that the Crown immediately steal him back “as a free gift and as a symbol of love to all the people of New Zealand”. The Waitangi Tribunal has found there was probably no “evidence that the hapū agreed” to the Crown stealing ‘ownership’ back. Egmont National Park is still the only remaining national park on whenua raupatu (stolen land). 

Usually, a Treaty of Waitangi (note: not Te Tiriti o Waitangi) settlement with the Crown is the opportunity for iwi (note: not hapū) to get back some (note: some) of their whenua that was stolen. But with the maunga being tūpuna, Tuuta explained, “it didn’t feel right for iwi to own them”. 

Legal personhood is more than just land back: it is a legal recognition of the high status of our tūpuna. 

Kaiwhakahaere-ā-tau Tuatoru of Ngā Rangahautira, Christie Wallace (Te Atihaunui-ā-Pāpārangi, Ngāti Apa) grew up in Whanganui and is an uri of Te Awa Tupua o Whanganui and Rātana. She says that legal personhood “meant everything to Te Atihaunui-ā-Pāpārangi iwi. It was the conclusion of the iwi’s grievances with the Crown that span over 100 years; during which the iwi had asserted their claim of ownership over Te Awa Tupua through protest, petitions, litigation, and other formal objections.” 

As for the flaws of Te Awa Tupua arrangement, Christie says, “Legal personhood over Te Awa Tupua fails to vest ownership over the river in Te Atihaunui-ā-Pāpārangi despite the fact that the iwi consistently sought and asserted ownership [...]. As a result, the iwi misses out on the material gains founded in property ownership and the mechanisms available to iwi to enforce their rights in the river may be considered illusory.” In this property-centric country, monetary gains and power may be the only tangible way that iwi can exert their rights over tūpuna.

Though iwi won't own their tūpuna in the sense of Pākehā ownership, legal personhood arrangements can restore the ability of iwi and hapū to exercise kaitiakitanga (see Te Waikamihi’s article on page 14!) as best they can. Ngā Rangahautira Tumuaki Kaea Hudson (Ngāti Hine, Ngāti Awa, Ngāi Tūhoe), whose whenua is buried at Te Urewera, reflected on the legal personhood of Te Urewera. “In some ways, it 'gave back' Te Urewera for the modern formation of Tūhoe to awhi, tiaki and tautoko. Te Urewera is pretty central to the Tūhoe way of life, our hītori and kōrero. Legal recognition of its importance doesn't define it but it is a step in the right direction.” 

Is it worth the struggle to recognise, as Kaea put it to me, “what Māori have always known”? The negotiators of Te Kāhui Tupua arrangement faced a lot of pushback from the Crown, and at times, walked away from negotiations completely. The Crown said, outright, that Te Urewera arrangement was not to be replicated — that is, a national park was to remain on the maunga. They also refused to negotiate the inclusion of water management provisions, likely due to the upcoming Three Waters situation. 

Representatives of ngā iwi o Taranaki still managed to push the boundaries for our people. He Kawa Tupua and the values contained in it must be upheld by DOC at every stage of their administration of Te Papa-Kura-o-Taranaki. When it comes to interpreting He Kawa Tupua, the reo Māori version will be the one followed. As for the human face and voice, says Tuuta, “There’s sufficient optionality and flexibility around what we can do.” Te Tōpuni Kōkōrangi has wide decision-making powers and can enter into relationships with agencies that will benefit the maunga themselves. 

Conservation is at the heart of the Crown’s stance on legal personhood of maunga, awa, and whenua. From a Pākehā perspective, conservation can look like stopping people from being in these places altogether. But “conservation should not be about shutting people out”, says Tuuta. Nothing in legal personhood arrangements bars iwi and hapū from doing what they need to to be kaitiaki and maintain their relationship with their tūpuna. 

Despite being fans of conservation, the current national park funding framework means the money the Crown makes from people with concessions to operate businesses on the maunga is not directly invested back into the well-being of the Taranaki maunga.  When the new arrangement comes into play, Te Kāhui Tupua will have to “fix the things the Crown hasn’t actually done” themselves, said Tuuta. 

The classic questions I have as a critical Māori law student float around in my mind. If these arrangements are made within the bounds of Pākehā law, are they really recognising the tino rangatiratanga of our tūpuna and ways of life guaranteed to us in Article 2 of Te Tiriti? 

The arguments of Ani Mikaere (Ngāti Raukawa, Ngāti Porou), Kaihautū Whakatupu Mātauranga at Te Wānanga o Raukawa, in ‘Tikanga as the First Law of Aotearoa’, help me find an answer. 

“I do not think we should settle for mere improvements in the Pākehā system as the ultimate goal… We have to remember our tikanga is the product of tino rangatiratanga, whereas creations of Pākehā law… are products of Crown sovereignty”. We cannot view Te Kāhui Tupua arrangement entirely as a product of tikanga, as it was created wholly by the colonial laws of Aotearoa, such as deeds of settlement and legislation. This is exemplified by the fact that four members of Te Tōpuni Kōkōrangi—that is, half—are to be appointed by the Crown? Um, red flag? Why do we need the Crown to decide half the face of our maunga? 

From the perspective of negotiator Liana Poutu (Te Ātiawa, Taranaki), “The role of those people [...] is not to advocate a Crown position, or an iwi position. Their role is to act on behalf of our maunga.” The four members appointed by the Crown do not have to work, or even represent, the Crown, Poutu pointed out, and she hopes our people will be prioritised. Besides, Kahurangi Dame Tariana Turia (Ngāti Apa, Ngaa Rauru, Ngāti Tūwharetoa, Whanganui Iwi) was the first Crown-appointed member of the face and voice for Te Awa Tupua.

Colonial law is not going away just yet, and to ignore that would be to deny the hard work of our tūpuna to get us where we are today. “We haven’t had to fight for our reo” in the way our tūpuna had to, Tuuta explained. This means we can focus on centering our reo and tikanga in our legal personhood arrangements, and do it for those who couldn’t be here to see it.

Christie says that, on a bigger level, legal personhood goes towards the recognition of tikanga in the dominant legal system. “It provides a rationale to conceptualise Māori values, such as the personification of natural resources and the obligations people have to protect our natural environment. [This is] a step away from traditional Western notions of property which views rivers and other natural resources as something to be owned, commodified, and exploited.”

As for the future, for ngā iwi o Taranaki, it’s looking collaborative (if Te Ruruku Pūtakerongo gets ratified by voting members, that is). Negotiating the arrangement is the first time all eight iwi have worked together in this way. The arrangement, Poutu says, “gives us a legal entity, we’re able to do things together [within]”. After legislation enables the arrangement to legally exist, it will still take time to create the management plan for Te Papa-Kura-o-Taranaki and fully implement He Kawa Tupua. As a ‘cultural’ settlement, ngā iwi o Taranaki are not going to make personal gains. All money invested and given in this settlement is for the benefit of the maunga.

“Where the co-governance structures created under legal personhood inhibit iwi authority to manage the natural resources affairs [...] then this might call for different approaches to that aspect of legal personhood,” says Christie on the future of legal personhood arrangements. Though settlements are ‘full and final’, there should be scope within them to get creative and realise their purpose if it's not being met. 

The future, for me, is where Aotearoa acknowledges and acts in accordance with the way we, and our tūpuna, view the maunga. I want people to give him the respect he deserves.

Though, the obvious raru with the Crown remains for me, I am excited for my maunga. I am excited to obnoxiously correct the old, white men of the Taranaki region when they say ‘Mount Egmont’. He will be Taranaki Maunga only! 

My nana spent the last part of her life working as a negotiator for the Te Ātiawa ki Taranaki settlement, and I am immensely proud of the battles she, my tūpuna, whānau, and whanaunga have won to get us to this point. I have hope my mokopuna will enable Taranaki Maunga to have a say in the running of Aotearoa as a whole. 

If you are registered with one or more of the eight iwi o Taranaki, you can vote on Te Ruruku Pūtakerongo. For more information, visit taranakimaunga.nz