10 / 40
The Court of Appeal noted in that
case that the Sim Commission's
report had failed to convey “…
an expressed sense of the
crippling impact of Raupatu
on the welfare, economy and
potential development of Tainui”,
and that the subsequent annual
monetary payments made by the
Government were trivial “in present
day money values”, and concluded
that “Some form of more real and
constructive compensation is
obviously called for if the Treaty is
to be honoured”.
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
CROWN
In 1989 the Crown and Waikato
entered into direct negotiations
in which Waikato pursued
compensation on the basis of
their long established principles
of “land for land”—“i riro whenua
atu, me hoki whenua mai” (“as
land was taken, land must be
returned”) and “ko te moni hei utu
mo te hara” (“the money is the
acknowledgment by the Crown of
their crime”).
In 1993 as a goodwill gesture the
Crown vested the Hopuhopu
Military Base in Pootatau Te
Wherowhero for the benefit
of Waikato.
a century removed from the
event, all sources agree that the
Tainui people of the Waikato never
rebelled but were attacked by
British troops in direct violation of
Article II of the Treaty of Waitangi”.
On 16 March 1987 Robert Te Kotahi
Mahuta, on behalf of himself and
on behalf of the members of
Waikato-Tainui, the Tainui Maaori
Trust Board, and Ngaa Marae
Toopu, submitted a claim to the
Waitangi Tribunal under the Treaty
of Waitangi Act 1975 in relation
to the Raupatu, that claim being
registered with the Waitangi
Tribunal as Wai 30.
COURT OF APPEAL
The injustice of the Raupatu is as
keenly felt by Waikato today as in
the past, as has been testified by
Waikato kaumaatua and kuia in the
affidavits filed by the plaintiffs in R
T Mahuta and Tainui Maaori Trust
Board v Attorney-General [1989] 2
NZLR 513.
“land for land”
-“i riro whenua atu,
me hoki whenua mai”
(“as land was taken, land
must be returned”)
8