Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 17, Number 1, 1 January 2000 — Two steps to self-determination: Part II [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Two steps to self-determination: Part II

N DECEMBER, I explored the first step for Hawaiians to take in the process of self-determination: the ehoiee of polhieal status ffom a number of options whieh might include a form of monarchy, a nation within a nation (similar to the American Indians' autonomy), ffee association. independence. or incorporation and statehood as under the status quo. I also said. Hawaiians could consider whether their nation should be able to print money, control land. create courts of justice or exercise other powers. Step Two involves the election of delegates who represent the people's political will and the people's community. These representatives write the constitution of the new nation consistent with the will of the people expressed in Step One. For example, if 75 percent of Hawaiians vote to restore the monarchy, then the delegates to the constitutional convention must create a constitutional monarchy. They are not given free rein but must implement the will of those who chose them and to whom they are accountable. Apportionment is also a feature of Step Two. Land-based delegates must live in the district from whieh they are elected and must be elected by people within the district. The land base is divided into districts based on criteria including populahon, a eommon history

and a community of interest. Therē are 200,000 Hawaiians in Hawai'i. If 100 delegates are to be elected, then eaeh represents 2,000 Hawaiians. If Honoluluhas 100,000 people, Honolulu Hawaiians elect 50 delegates. IfKailuahas 10,000 Hawaiians, Kailua Hawaiians elect five delegates. What about small communities where there are not enough Hawaiians to qualify to elect even one represenfotnra9 Tf fl-taca or>tr>irni

l el L 1 VV/ . XI euiiuiiu" nities were lumped into another district, their unique Hawaiians perspective would never be represented. So exceptions should be made for "insular communities" such as Miloli'i and Kalapana. Both are unique fishing communities and neither has 2,000 people. If they were lumped with Kona, their small vote would be overwhelmed. Rule-making ean and should aeeommodate insular communities where Hawaiians with a eommon history continue rural and traditional values and practices. The key in self-determination processes

is to be truly representative of all peoples. f ome delegates C would represent the political will of the ■ people as reflected W in the political status ballot or Step One. Speaking hypothetically, if 100 delegates were apportioned according to the community/landbase, 70 others might represent the political will. The 70 would be elected at large, based on their commitment to the options on the polkieal ctatnc r\ o 1 1 nt Hr\r ov a m

oiaiuo uaiivi. i ui uaoiii ple, suppose that on the political status ballot 10 percent of Hawaiians want a monarchv. 30 nercent

want a traditional government, 40 percent want a nation within a nation and 20 percent want ffee assoeiahon. Given that scenario, seven out of 70, or 10 percent, of the delegates would be elected ffom an at-large slate of candidates supporting a monarchy, 14 from a ffee

association slate, 21 ffom a traditional slate and 28 from nation within a nation slate. Rule-making will set up the guidelines for districting, insular communities, speeial initiatives on the ballot, time frame for challenges, logistics and the actual conducting of the political status ballot and the sovereignty ballot. The primary goal is to be inclusive while being practieal. A steering committee oversees the two-step self-determination process. The steering committee may be elected or formed through consensus. Non-natives may be included, but they should not exceed the native members whose rights of self-determination are at issue. Also necessary are unbiased observers to ensure the integrity of the process. For Hawai'i, an international team would be appropriate. ■

TRU STEE MESSAGES

[?]