law in many domains, public pwhiri allow the cultural processes of Maori to be recognised within the social sphere. It is this

kind of social exposure and acceptance that leads to legal incorporaon – if much of society are not exposed to Tikanga

principles and maori culture in general, they will be unlikely to peon for its greater recognion within the law itself.

Forcing the Powhiri into the private domain due to avoid claims about breaching human rights would be to ‘banish’ this process

and severely limit the exposure of Maori culture for many non-Maori individuals who would not otherwise encounter a pwhiri

other than in a public domain. This would be to further alienate Tikanga and its principles from modern society.

The court should look at this through the lense of substanve equality and recognise that the pwhiri process is one of the

specific cultural circumstances where although there is formal inequality, there is substanve equality.

One must have an

understanding of Tikanga Maori and the principles of the pwhiri process to recognise this. The law should have a basic

understanding of Tikanga principles when it is passing judgement on a Maori process governed by Tikanga – and this would likely

lead them to the conclusion that overall this process is not discriminatory.

Also important to consider that Tikanga is a fluid not stac system. It can adapt and mould as circumstances change

If Powhiri was happening in employment context – you could potenally choose to opt out of it. Or they could do cultural

competency classes at work so people understand the Tikanga

Who should smulate change?

If change does occur to the pwhiri– who should smulate this?



“External forces”?

o

Pakeha women e.g. Bullock

o

Public at large

o

Courts (eg Bullock)

Should these external forces being the ones to dictate whether the pwhiri process is correct/fair and should be in

the public domain?



“Internal forces”

o

Māori as a whole – maori decide whether kanga principles should be changed

o

Leave it up to iwi/hapu/whanau

o

Māori women (force to choose if they think its okay or not) - (North American cases: indigenous women who

have challenged custom have suffered considerable backlash – would maori women suffer backlash for trying

to change the process)

Lecturer thinks it should be people of maori descent who change their own kanga. Not Western individuals who come in with

ideas of individual autonomy

If we have these external forces coming in and dictang what should happen, this may undermine and have negave effects on

kanga

In any case, it is not permissible for Pakeha women, the public at large, or the courts to smulate change. It is up to

Maori women to voice their concerns if they have any. And then it will be up to the relevant iwi to decide to change

their kawa as a collecve.

Difficules in external value judgments

Understanding of culture and context:

a lot of the mes, peoples first view of the process would be that is definitely

discriminaon on the basis of sex (i.e. if looked at bullock case without knowing kanga)– however your ideas may

change when you are more aware of kanga maori



Eg banning of headscarves in French schools



Muslim women against Western feminists – Muslim women believe in substanve equality, whilst from a

western perspecve it may look like they are being discriminated on the basis of sex, they believe in

substanve equality – women have their role and men have their role