Aotearoa New Zealand’s Parliament has confirmed the unprecedented punishments proposed for opposition indigenous Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka in protest against the Treaty Principles Bill.

Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi will be suspended for 21 days, and MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke suspended for seven days, taking effect immediately.

Opposition parties tried to reject the recommendation, but did not have the numbers to vote it down.

Te Pati Maori MPs speak after being suspended.  Video: RNZ/Mark Papalii

The heated debate to consider the proposed punishment came to an end just before Parliament was due to rise.

Waititi moved to close the debate and no party disagreed, ending the possibility of it carrying on in the next sitting week.

Leader of the House Chris Bishop — the only National MP who spoke — kicked off the debate earlier in the afternoon saying it was “regrettable” some MPs did not vote on the Budget two weeks ago.

Bishop had called a vote ahead of Budget Day to suspend the privileges report debate to ensure the Te Pāti Māori MPs could take part in the Budget, but not all of them turned up.

Robust, rowdy debate
The debate was robust and rowdy with both the deputy speaker Barbara Kuriger and temporary speaker Tangi Utikare repeatedly having to ask MPs to quieten down.

Tākuta Ferris spoke first for Te Pāti Māori, saying the haka was a “signal of humanity” and a “raw human connection”.

He said Māori had faced acts of violence for too long and would not be silenced by “ignorance or bigotry”.

“Is this really us in 2025, Aotearoa New Zealand?” he asked the House.

“Everyone can see the racism.”

He said the Privileges Committee’s recommendations were not without precedent, noting the fact Labour MP Peeni Henare, who also participated in the haka, did not face suspension.

Henare attended the committee and apologised, which contributed to his lesser sanction.

‘Finger gun’ gesture
MP Parmjeet Parmar — a member of the Committee — was first to speak on behalf of ACT, and referenced the hand gesture — or “finger gun” — that Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer made in the direction of ACT MPs during the haka.

Parmar told the House debate could be used to disagree on ideas and issues, and there was not a place for intimidating physical gestures.

Greens co-leader Marama Davidson said New Zealand’s Parliament could lead the world in terms of involving the indigenous people.

She said the Green Party strongly rejected the committee’s recommendations and proposed their amendment of removing suspensions, and asked the Te Pāti Māori MPs be censured instead.

Davidson said the House had evolved in the past — such as the inclusion of sign language and breast-feeding in the House.

She said the Greens were challenging the rules, and did not need an apology from Te Pāti Māori.

NZ First leader Winston Peters said Te Pāti Māori and the Green Party speeches so far showed “no sincerity, saying countless haka had taken place in Parliament but only after first consulting the Speaker.

“They told the media they were going to do it, but they didn’t tell the Speaker did they?

‘Bunch of extremists’
“The Māori party are a bunch of extremists,” Peters said, “New Zealand has had enough of them”.

Peters was made to apologise after taking aim at Waititi, calling him “the one in the cowboy hat” with “scribbles on his face” [in reference to his traditional indigenous moko — tatoo]. He continued afterward, describing Waititi as possessing “anti-Western values”.

Labour’s Willie Jackson congratulated Te Pāti Māori for the “greatest exhibition of our culture in the House in my lifetime”.

Jackson said the Treaty bill was a great threat, and was met by a great haka performance. He was glad the ACT Party was intimidated, saying that was the whole point of doing the haka.

He also called for a bit of compromise from Te Pāti Māori — encouraging them to say sorry — but reiterated Labour’s view the sanctions were out of proportion with past indiscretions in the House.

Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said the debate “would be a joke if it wasn’t so serious”.

“Get an absolute grip,” she said to the House, arguing the prime minister “is personally responsible” if the House proceeds with the committee’s proposed sanctions.

Eye of the beholder
She accused National’s James Meager of “pointing a finger gun” at her — the same gesture coalition MPs had criticised Ngarewa-Packer for during her haka. The Speaker accepted he had not intended to; Swarbrick said it was an example where the interpretation could be in the eye of the beholder.

She said if the government could “pick a punishment out of thin air” that was “not a democracy”, putting New Zealand in very dangerous territory.

An emotional Maipi-Clarke said she had been silent on the issue for a long time, the party’s voices in haka having sent shockwaves around the world. She questioned whether that was why the MPs were being punished.

“Since when did being proud of your culture make you racist?”

“We will never be silenced, and we will never be lost,” she said, calling the Treaty Principles bill a “dishonourable vote”.

She had apologised to the Speaker and accepted the consequence laid down on the day, but refused to apologise. She listed other incidents in Parliament that resulted in no punishment.

NZ Parliament TV: Te Pāti Māori Privileges committee debate.  Video: RNZ

Maipi-Clarke called for the Treaty of Waitangi to be recognised in the Constitution Act, and for MPs to be required to honour it by law.

‘Clear pathway forward’
“The pathway forward has never been so clear,” she said.

ACT’s Nicole McKee said there were excuses being made for “bad behaviour”, that the House was for making laws and having discussions, and “this is not about the haka, this is about process”.

She told the House she had heard no good ideas from the Te Pāti Māori, who she said resorted to intimidation when they did not get their way, but the MPs needed to “grow up” and learn to debate issues. She hoped 21 days would give them plenty of time to think about their behaviour.

Labour MP and former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe started by saying there were “no winners in this debate”, and it was clear to him it was the government, not the Parliament, handing out the punishments.

He said the proposed sanctions set a precedent for future penalties, and governments might use it as a way to punish opposition, imploring National to think twice.

He also said an apology from Te Pāti Māori would “go a long way”, saying they had a “huge opportunity” to have a legacy in the House, but it was their choice — and while many would agree with the party there were rules and “you can’t have it both ways”.

Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said there had been many instances of misinterpretations of the haka in the House and said it was unclear why they were being punished, “is it about the haka . . . is about the gun gestures?”

“Not one committee member has explained to us where 21 days came from,” he said.

Hat and ‘scribbles’ response
Waititi took aim at Peters over his comments targeting his hat and “scribbles” on his face.

He said the haka was an elevation of indigenous voice and the proposed punishment was a “warning shot from the colonial state that cannot stomach” defiance.

Waititi said that throughout history when Māori did not play ball, the “coloniser government” reached for extreme sanctions, ending with a plea to voters: “Make this a one-term government, enrol, vote”.

He brought out a noose to represent Māori wrongfully put to death in the past, saying “interpretation is a feeling, it is not a fact . . .  you’ve traded a noose for legislation”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A vote of no confidence in Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape is set to be moved on May 29.

Sinasina-Yongamugl Open MP Kerenga Kua told the media yesterday that the Marape government had “subverted the opposition’s attempts to hold them accountable for their actions”.

“I want to give confidence to the people of Papua New Guinea that this opposition is committed to ensuring that this government is brought to account,” Kua, an opposition MP, said at a media conference in Port Moresby.

“People are screaming for accountability. On behalf of the people. We are serious. The people are sick and tired of this government.

“They want to see the back of this government. They want to see them out.”

The opposition bloc stands by the motion filed on February 20 despite discrepancies raised by the overseeing Private Business Committee in a letter.

“The Acting Speaker was clear and advised that there was a discrepancy or discrepancies and so on legal advice, we have opted to not challenge that stance.

“But then by the position that the integrity of the notice of motion that we have filed is intact,” said opposition MP Keith Iduhu.

Accused the opposition
He said in their view there were no issues with the paper despite the Prime Minister having “rubbished it” and accused the opposition of forging names.

“If the committee or this chair decides to tamper with the motion . . . in any manner other than contemplated by the Supreme Court, section 23 of the constitution will be invoked and punitive measures will be sought from the courts,” Iduhu said.

“What that means is that penalties to the tune of even imprisonment up to 10 years,” he said.

“We will not hesitate to exercise our rights and the cause under the constitution.”

RNZ Pacific understands that Acting Speaker Koni Iguan and the Private Business Committee would be impacted on if that is the case.

Meanwhile, Marape said last week he would refer the second motion of no confidence paper — the one the opposition bloc said it stands by — to the Parliamentary Privileges Committee following allegations of forgery.

“It looks as if somebody is cutting and pasting these signatures and filling in names,” Marape said.

Acting Speaker Iguan told Parliament on Thursday last week that the first motion of no confidence did not qualify to be listed on the notice paper.

All MPs accountable – watchdog
Transparency International PNG (TIPNG) said the abuse of Parliament’s processes undermined public confidence and “fed corruption”.

TIPNG said all MPs were ultimately accountable to the people of PNG.

The anti-corruption watchdog said undermining democratic processes not only erodes public trust but hinders the country’s progress and development.

It said the refusal of the acting speaker to allow the motion for a vote against the prime minister, followed by an adjournment until May raises serious questions.

TIPNG chair Peter Aitsi said the motion is a fundamental tool within the parliamentary system, allowing MPs to hold the executive accountable.

He said denying a no confidence motion without due process was an affront to the democratic rights of both the opposition and the people they represented.

It “perpetuates a culture of impunity and weakens the already fragile checks and balances within the government and fuels an environment rife to corrupt behaviour,” he said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

FijiFirst leader Voreqe Bainimarama remains as Leader of the Opposition despite his suspension from Parliament on Friday for breach of privilege, according to Fiji constitutional lawyer Richard Naidu.

Naidu told the Sunday Times he believed that Bainimarama was entitled to retain the salary and other rights that go with the job — although “there might be a legal argument” about that.

He said that the Leader of the Opposition was different from other MPs who had previously been suspended.

“He is not an ordinary MP. His position is established under the Constitution. Under Section 78, he is elected from among the Opposition members,” he said.

“Under Section 78 of the Constitution, he keeps his job even after the dissolution of Parliament.”

Naidu said the Opposition Leader had other constitutional roles outside Parliament, including being a member of the Constitutional Offices Commission (COC).

“He is also one of the people who may nominate a new President for Parliament to vote on under Section 84.

‘Must not be varied’
“It seems that he can continue to do these jobs — and to keep his salary, which Section 80 of the Constitution says “must not be varied to his disadvantage”.

“Other suspended MPs have had their salary payments suspended while out of Parliament.

“So there might be a legal argument about that.

“But other suspended MPs did not hold a substantive office as Mr Bainimarama does.”

Naidu said that despite the suspension, Bainimarama remained an MP — however, he could not attend Parliament for three years.

“While he is suspended, he is not replaced in Parliament. This means the voting strength of the FijiFirst Party drops to 25 while he is suspended.

“It is for the Opposition MPs to work out how they will operate in Parliament while Bainimarama isn’t there. But while he continues to hold the post, a new Leader of the Opposition cannot be appointed.

Could be voted out
“Under the Constitution, if a majority of Opposition members want Bainimarama out, they could vote him out.

“He could resign as Leader of the Opposition only and keep his seat as an MP. Or he could resign both as Leader of the Opposition and as an MP.

“If he resigned as an MP, a new FijiFirst Parliamentarian would come in; the next one on the list of candidates who missed out in the 2022 election.”

Questions regarding the suspension were sent to both Bainimarama and FijiFirst party general secretary Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum yesterday.

However, no response was obtained when this edition of the newspaper went to press.

Shayal Devi is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz