YES: The time might be ripe again to pursue action for Native Hawaiians’ self-determination

Submitted by Kioni Dudley

It’s surprising how sovereignty is suddenly coming alive again. Spontaneous activity is sprouting up in quite unexpected places. It’s like the spirits of ancient Hawaii nudging people to action.

The Star-Advertiser editorial, "’Reconciliation’ eludes Hawaiians" (Our View, Star-Advertiser, Nov. 27), is just the latest example. Hawaiian sovereignty is in the air. Perhaps this is its time.

If so, the non-Hawaiian community must also become involved; its support will be crucial to success. Past polls have shown that as many as 84 percent of non-Hawaiians support some form of Hawaiian sovereignty. That’s not surprising. We are island communities. Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians live and work and party together, and have intermarried since the first white men arrived. It is now time to trust each other and work together toward some form of Hawaiian nationhood.

Twenty years ago, the 100th anniversary of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom was a catalyst for study and action. Sovereignty groups arose; the federal government funded research; and the state funded an election of delegates and a convention. Interestingly, however, only enough funds were allocated to get the convention started; there was no money for it to continue.

Delegates from neighbor islands struggled to attend, an agreement was reached that embraced an independence model, and a Constitution was written. It was ignored, however, and a "more politically acceptable" integration model known as the Akaka Bill was devised and put before Congress. It fared no better. The failure of both efforts was actually fortunate.

During the past 20 years, newspapers from the time of the overthrow and annexation have been translated, and a much clearer picture has emerged. The strong Hawaiian resistance at that time, suppressed in history books during decades when Hawaiians were forbidden to use their language, can now be followed in detail. It’s exciting material.

And understanding young America’s belief in its "Manifest Destiny" — which motivated U.S occupation and colonization efforts in the Pacific during the 1800s — has helped to explain the aggressive American actions here that culminated in the overthrow, annexation and statehood.

During the past 20 years, numerous countries that had once been occupied or colonized, achieved independence and became members of the United Nations. They have brought to that body a great concern for nations in similar situations.

That concern has not been lost on those supporting an independence model of nationhood in Hawaii. Some now teach courses on U.S. occupation and international law at our universities and community colleges. Others have engaged international diplomatic and legal institutions. H.E. Leon Siu, for instance, has been working effectively at the U.N., building support. Keanu Sai has filed complaints with the International Court of Justice.

Meanwhile, some pursuing a more modest "integration" form of nationhood are working to get President Barack Obama to use his executive power to recognize a Hawaiian nation. There is also a renewed effort to get Native Hawaiians to sign up to participatein a future nation, the Kana’iolowalu roll project. A convention to determine the form of a new nation could follow the Kana’iolowalu enrollment. 

The co-signatories of this article are developing a series of public educational forums, "The Sovereignty Conversation — Community Forums," that will give all of these conflicting interests a voice. Starting in January, the forums will be held at the Kapolei High School cafeteria on the third Tuesday of each month from 7 to 9:30 p.m. To involve all of Hawaii’s people, they will be televised live on NATV Channel 53, and will be available for future access at www.olelo.org.

These programs were initiated by the Hawaiian Affairs Committee of the Makakilo-Kapolei-Honokai Hale Neighborhood Board. It is hoped that both the Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian communites will enter the conversation.

This is your chance to have a voice. The theme of this series is "Moving forward together to restore the beloved nation." Let us move forward together.

——

This piece was co-signedby Keoni Kealoha Agard, Z. Aki, Puanani Burgess, Tony Castanha, Kioni Dudley, Poka Laenui, Jon Osorio, H.E. Leon Siu, Pilipo Souza and Kuhio Vogeler. For more information or to support the program series, call 672-8888.

NO: There will be much divisiveness and turmoil if the sovereignty movement succeeds

By Kenneth R. Conklin

This newspaper and its predecessors have repeatedly editorialized in favor of the Akaka Bill or executive action to create a federally recognized Hawaiian tribe.

The latest version of the Akaka Bill, which passed its Senate committee in September 2012, says the Akaka tribe would have the same status as all other federally recognized tribes without any of the limitations found in previous versions of the bill.

For example, it explicitly puts the Hawaiian tribe under the same law as mainland tribes for regulating gambling casinos. That version of the bill is the final legacy of U.S. Sens. Dan Akaka and Dan Inouye; it’s what the Hawaiian establishment has always wanted, and what executive action would create.

Hawaii’s people need to be informed about the large body of federal Indian law that would suddenly come into Hawaii, drastically changing or replacing long-settled state laws. Here are a few: Indian Non-Intercourse Act(s); Indian Reorganization Act of 1934; Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; Indian Child Welfare Act; inherent powers of self-government.

The supremacy clause of the Constitution says federal law (including Indian law) overcomes state law whenever there’s a clash. With passage of the Akaka Bill, thousands of federal laws and court decisions would suddenly become operational in Hawaii, causing massive disruption to our legal system.

The turmoil would be comparable to a ship bringing thousands of invasive species, which overwhelm and destroy our ecosystem. Some consequences would be as immediately visible as poisoning or traumatic injury; many would at first go unnoticed but develop gradually like heart disease or cancer.

Federal Indian law would allow the Akaka tribe to remove huge amounts of land from the state and county tax base, forcing taxes to be raised or services greatly reduced. The authority to regulate zoning, labor laws, workman’s compensation for injury, enforcement of contracts, child custody, civil and criminal law, would be removed from the state and counties on tribal lands or for ethnic Hawaiians everywhere. Jurisdiction would shift to tribal courts, where laws and procedures could be very different and inherently favorable to tribal interests.

A federally recognized Akaka tribe would also have the U.S. Department of Justice providing lawyers and funding to support tribal litigation. The state, counties, small businesses and individuals would be forced to spend enormous amounts of money and time dealing with unfamiliar laws and procedures in front of hostile tribal judges.

A mainland tribe’s reservation is often in a single location far removed from non-Indian towns. But in Hawaii there would be chaos among conflicting jurisdictions due to tribal lands being interspersed among state, county and private lands. Consider all the parcels owned by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Kamehameha Schools. In addition there would be numerous small and large parcels transferred from county, state and federal jurisdiction because of settlement negotiations or lawsuits.

No other state has 20 percent of its population who are racially Indian, let alone 20 percent eligible to join one single tribe. Hawaii would have a major voting bloc who elect the state legislators and administrators who negotiate against the tribe, while that same voting bloc also elects the tribal leaders who will make demands against the state officials. Numerous state and county legislators and administrators, or their spouses and family members, would actually be members of the tribe whose leaders make demands against them. Talk about conflict of interest!

Federal recognition of a Hawaiian tribe would permanently divide the lands and people of Hawaii along racial lines, promoting political and legal battles while greatly worsening racial hostility. It’s a recipe for disaster. Stop it.

——

Kenneth R. Conklin, an activist against Hawaiian sovereignty and race-based policies, was a co-plaintiff in the successful lawsuit to allow non-Hawaiians to run for Office of Hawaiian Affairs trustee.