Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 13, Number 7, 1 July 1996 — Response to criticisms of the Vote [ARTICLE]

Response to criticisms of the Vote

• State monies mean state control. Therefore, this plebiscite process is not independent. Clariflcation Currently, monies eome from the state Legislature and OHA. There has been no case in whieh either side attempted to control this process. If we adopt the simplistic belief that money source means money control, then the U.H. Department of Hawaiian Studies, Ka Lāhui Hawai'i, and many other organizations whieh receive government dollars are not independent but controlled by the govemment. • This process violates international law. The state should have no part in aiding indigenous people's development of self-governance. Clariflcation There is no basis in intemational law to support this allegation. In intemational law on decolonization, the U.S. govemment is charged with accepting as "a sacred tmst the obligation to promote to the utrnost ... the well-being of the inhabitants and to this end to promote constructive measures of development." The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, passed under of the U.N. Charter, calls upon govemments to cease armed action or repressive measures in order to enable the people to exercise freely their right to complete independence. Subsequently, the U.N. adopted two fundamental covenants on human rights whieh reiterated the eall for govemment to promote the right of self-

determination. In 1970, the U.N. called on its members to specifically render all necessary moral and material assistance to the people in their struggle to attain freedom and independence. Thus, according to international Iaw, in both the area of decolonization and indigenous peoples' rights, govemments are called upon to bc active in thc promotion of selt-govemance and the protection of rights, even to the extent of providing the necessary resources in order to achieve such results. • Nothing coming out of the Native Hawaiian Vote process or convention will change anything for Hawaiians becau.se of the language in Section 14 of the legislation that created the Uouneil. Clarification Section 14 of Act 200, SLH 1994, only provides that actions taken as a result of the Act do not automatically change the Hawai'i Constitution, state law, ordinances, rulcs or regulations. There is nothing in Section 14 that suggests in any way that the State will ignore the results of decisions made by Hawaiians. The repeal of Section 14 would be unwise as that section was enacted by the Legislature when the role of the Council changed from from advisory in nature to one of autonomy. The Legislature adopted Section 14 to ensure that the authority granted to the Council would not be deemed as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power within the state's constitutional framework.