Massive Māori Protests Draw Tens of Thousands to New Zealand Capital

Over 40,000 individuals demonstrated outside New Zealand’s parliament in opposition to a contentious legislative proposal that aims to redefine the nation’s foundational agreement between British colonizers and the Māori population. The demonstration on Tuesday concluded a nine-day hīkoi, a term for a peaceful protest, which had traversed the country. The proposed Treaty Principles bill advocates for New Zealand to re-evaluate and legally establish the principles of the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, a document considered essential for the nation’s race relations. Numerous opponents view this as an effort to diminish the rights of Māori individuals. Conversely, proponents of the alteration assert that the treaty no longer accurately represents a multicultural society. The march held on Tuesday united activists and other individuals who oppose the legislation. The hīkoi grew to become one of the largest in the nation’s history, with many participants adorned in the colors of the Māori flag as they proceeded through Wellington, the capital. Its size significantly surpassed the 5,000-person gathering for land rights in 1975 and was twice the scale of another substantial hīkoi in 2004, which advocated for shore and sea ownership rights. Wellington’s rail system experienced what could have been its most active morning on record as the hīkoi moved through the capital, as stated by Thomas Nash, the city’s transport chair. Ngā Wai hono i te pō, the Māori Queen, guided the delegation onto the premises surrounding the Beehive, which serves as New Zealand’s parliament house, with thousands of people following. The legislation is improbable to be enacted, yet discussions and disagreements are expected to persist. A second reading is anticipated in six months. The Act political party, a junior partner in the ruling coalition, introduced the bill. David Seymour, the party’s leader, asserts that the treaty’s fundamental principles have, over time, fostered racial divisions rather than promoting unity. Seymour, who possesses Māori ancestry, informed the BBC, “My Treaty Principles Bill says that I, like everybody else, whether their ancestors came here a thousand years ago, like some of mine did, or just got off the plane at Auckland International Airport this morning to begin their journey as New Zealanders, have the same basic rights and dignity.” He further stated, “Your starting point is to take a human being and ask, what’s your ancestry? What kind of human are you? That used to be called prejudice. It used to be called bigotry. It used to be called profiling and discrimination. Now you’re trying to make a virtue of it. I think that’s a big mistake.” Concurrently, within the Beehive, Members of Parliament engaged in discussions regarding the proposed legislation. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was among them, stating that the bill would not become law, even though he is a member of the same coalition as the Act party. According to the New Zealand Herald, Luxon declared, “Our position as the National Party is unchanged. We won’t be supporting the bill beyond second reading and therefore it won’t become law.” He added, “We don’t think through the stroke of a pen you go rewrite 184 years of debate and discussion.” New Zealand is frequently regarded as a global leader in upholding indigenous rights; however, under the current centre-right government led by Luxon, concerns have emerged that these rights are now jeopardized. Stan Lingman, who has both Māori and Swedish heritage, informed the BBC prior to Tuesday’s protest, “They are trying to take our rights away.” He continued, “[The hikoi is] for all New Zealanders – white, yellow, pink, blue. We will fight against this bill.” Pamela, Stan’s wife, stated that she was participating in the march for her “mokos,” a Māori term for grandchildren. Some other New Zealand citizens expressed the view that the march had exceeded appropriate bounds. Barbara Lecomte, a resident of Wellington’s northern coastal suburbs, commented, “They [Māori] seem to want more and more and more.” She added, “There’s a whole cosmopolitan mix of different nationalities now. We are all New Zealanders. I think we should work together and have equal rights.” However, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, co-leader of Te Pāti Māori (Maori Party), believes that equality remains distant. She contended, “We can’t live equally if we have one people who are the indigenous people living ‘less than’.” She described the coalition government’s actions as “an absolute attempt to divide an otherwise progressive country and it’s really embarrassing.” Last week, New Zealand’s parliament experienced a temporary suspension when Members of Parliament performed a haka, a traditional dance, to express their opposition to the bill. Video of this event gained widespread attention. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer remarked, “To see it in parliament, in the highest house in Aotearoa, there’s been a real state of surprise and I think disappointment and sadness that in 2024 when we see politics and the Trump extremes, this is what the Māori are having to endure.” She added, “It’s humiliating for the government because we [New Zealand] are normally seen as punching above our weight in all of the great things in life.” On Monday, protest organizers instructed participants in the words and movements of the rally’s haka, with the attendees eagerly echoing the lyrics displayed on a large white sheet. Rose Raharuhi Spicer, a grandmother, stated, “This isn’t just any normal hīkoi – this is the hīkoi of everybody,” clarifying that they have urged non-Māori, Pacific Islanders, and the broader New Zealand population to offer their support. This marked Rose’s fourth participation in a hīkoi. She originates from Te Hāpua, New Zealand’s northernmost settlement, located directly north of Auckland. This village was also the starting point for the most renowned hīkoi in 1975, which protested land rights. On this occasion, she was accompanied by her children and grandchildren. She affirmed, “This is our grandchildren’s legacy.” She concluded, “It’s not just one person or one party – and to alter [it] is wrong.”