As I was reading journal articles, I came across this article written by J. Kauanui. I have taken info from her work and pasted her mana'o here about AKAKA Bill that I have found to be informative why the bill does not support Hawaiians!
"I almost did not attend the celebration of the grand opening of the National
Museum of the American Indian (nmai). I had been wading
through a range of political questions about my own and other Ka¯naka
Maoli (Native Hawaiian) participation and struggling with ambivalence
on a number of levels. As the museum opening approached, my anxieties
increased because I anticipated the Ka¯naka Maoli contingency comprising
almost entirely the same people I had been fighting for four years.
These were Ka¯naka Maoli who were Office of Hawaiian Affairs (oha)
trustees, leaders of the Hawaiian civic clubs and Papa Ola Lo¯kahi (the
Native Hawaiian Health Project), and others who are the key supporters
of a state-driven proposal for U.S. federal legislation, which would recognize
a Hawaiian governing entity within Native American policy. The
proposed Native Hawaiian Reorganization Act, also known as the Akaka
bill, was introduced by Senator Daniel K. Akaka (D-Hawai'i). Unbeknownst
to many within Indian Country and the United States as a
whole, a thriving Hawaiian independence movement is taking place in
the islands today" (p. 496).
Senator Akaka’s legislative proposal undercuts our sovereignty rights
under international law, especially since there has not been any manner
of formally extinguishing the rights of Hawai'i as an independent nation-
state.4 Moreover, the proposed legislation is a violation of both
sovereignty and self-determination claims already acknowledged in the
Apology Resolution passed by the U.S. Congress in 1993 during the one hundredth-
year anniversary of the overthrow. In that apology (Public
Law 103-150), the U.S. government apologized to the Hawaiian people
for its complicity in the coup and acknowledged, “the indigenous
Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent
sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United
States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum.”
At stake is the struggle for our 'aina, including are 1.8 million
acres of former Crown and Government Lands of the Kingdom of
Hawai'i and a claim to independence that exceeds the U.S. domestic
model. Given that Hawaiian Kingdom sovereignty was not lost via conquest,
cession, or adjudication, our rights are still in place under international
law. When one looks at the history of U.S. federal recognition
for Indigenous domestic dependent nations, it is clear that passage of the
Akaka bill would set up a process to extinguish title to Hawai'i’s national
lands. The bill sets up the course for the formation of a governing entity
to be approved by the U.S. federal government. In that case, the will
of the people will appear to have been expressed—as a form of self determination
in support of federal recognition—and make international
intervention nearly impossible. Now more than ever, Ka¯naka
Maoli and others wishing to protect Hawai'i’s national claims under international
law are vocalizing resounding statements of refusal to consent.
It is one thing for those against independence to opt out of that
model of sovereignty and pursue federal recognition. But whether they
are informed enough to understand that they would be forfeiting our
tional sovereignty under international law is doubtful. Unfortunately,
many of the Hawaiians driving the federal proposal are ignorant of this
loss of our full claim. Instead of exploring the ways the U.S. government
contains Indigenous peoples’ claims at the un and the ways that international
law does not yet provide for Indigenous peoples’ independence
from settler states, these “leaders” of our community promise Hawaiians
that federal recognition is actually the “first step” toward independence" (p. 501).
SAY NO TO THE AKAKA BILL!!!Reference:
Kauanui, J. (2005). Contradictions and Celebrations. A Hawaiian reflection on the opening of the nmai. American Indian Quarterly, (29), 3/4, 496-504.
You need to be a member of maoliworld to add comments!
Replies