A total of 168 legal academics and lawyers signed a joint statement penned by Te Hunga Roia Māori | The Māori Law Society, condemning a controversial advertisement from right-wing lobby group Hobson’s Pledge.
The advertisement was featured on the front page of the Wednesday, August 7 edition of the New Zealand Herald.
It was the source of intense pressure from politicians and readers alike, leading the Herald’s publisher, NZME, to reject future ads from the group and cancel other Hobson’s Pledge ads it had already agreed to run.
Te Pāti Māori announced on Friday it would no longer engage with the New Zealand Herald unless its terms, including an apology, were met.
Waatea News has also cut ties with the news publisher.
The Māori legal community said the ad was “likely to mislead, deceive or confuse consumers, both explicitly and by implication, ambiguity, exaggeration, and false representation”.
It said Hobson’s Pledge was “entitled to a ‘robust expression of opinion’ but was “not entitled to mislead and deceive consumers”.
The statement also criticised the New Zealand Herald, saying it should have known, or investigated, whether the information was misleading or deceptive before the advertisement was published.”
The advertisement was accepted and placed by NZME’s commercial team, which has been contacted for comment.
The statement’s signatories include deans, professors, research fellows, as well as lawyers including King’s Counsel, partners, barristers through to junior associates, in-house lawyers, and non-practising lawyers.
Setting the record straight
Māori legal expert Dr Carwyn Jones (Ngāti Kahungunu, Te Aitanga-a-Māhaki) was a co-signatory of the statement, and said the Hobson’s Pledge ads were “deliberately misleading” leaving out key information.
“If you think about the way in which David Seymour’s dealing with the Treaty Principles Bill for instance, you’re taking these small statements out of context, giving them a different implication to an accurate interpretation of how these things apply.
“The whole message of the ad is that Māori are taking away your rights, other New Zealanders’ rights.
“Whereas in actual fact the Foreshore and Seabed Act and the Marine and Coastal Area Act, the only property rights that are being taken away are ones taken away from Māori,” Jones told Te Ao Māori News.
Jones explained the customary marine title was meant for Māori not to gatekeep the beach but instead to continue the title that existed before 1840.
“Essentially the idea is, that it’s a recognition of property rights that were held according to tikanga Māori and so in that sense, only Māori are able to claim those rights.”
Closing beaches not the case
The biggest misconception coming from the advertisement was that Māori would close down beaches from public use, which Jones and the legal community said wasn’t the case.
This is because the legislation enabling the award of customary marine titles secures public access to the foreshore.
They also said the foreshore had never historically been in public ownership due to it not being owned by anyone besides for areas that were currently in private ownership, primarily by non-Māori.
Also, iwi, hāpu or whānau couldn’t own any parts of the foreshore due to the legislation’s effective extinguishment of Māori property interests.
Hobson’s Pledge advertisement said: “A simple declaration that an area is sacred (wāhi tapu) or imposing a rāhui means no access for the public.”
But the Māori legal Community said: “There are very hard legal tests to be met before a wāhi tapu (including a rāhui) will be recognised. Moreover, wāhi tapu are subject to statutory restrictions, and cannot, for example, prevent fishers from taking their lawful entitlement in a quota or fisheries management area.”
Jones believes news organisations like the New Zealand Herald must ensure that they’re not producing misleading information even if it is a paid advertisement.
“It intentionally sets out to mislead the public and for the purpose of trying to be divisive, trying to create anti-Māori sentiment.
“I think that’s very clear and for those reasons, I think the the Herald should be taking more responsibility for what it publishes, even if it is a paid advertisement.”
