<-- CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

GENERAL QUESTIONS

 CONTENTS CHAPTER 3
HISTORY OF THE HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY MOVEMENT		 -->
The Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement:
Roles of and Impacts on Non-Hawaiians

By Anthony Castanha, August 1996

CHAPTER 2

SOVEREIGNTY AND SELF-DETERMINATION

The terms "sovereignty" and "self-determination" are used throughout this thesis. In this chapter I give a Western version of the meaning of sovereignty, and then present the meaning in a Hawaiian context through materials and writings of several major sovereignty organizations and leaders. The principle of self-determination is a well-established concept in international law and directly applies to the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. I will provide an account of this principle concerning Hawai'i and the sovereignty movement, particularly in the context of Hawaiian statehood. The major Hawaiian organizations discussed in this chapter are the Sovereign Nation-State of Hawai'i (Nation of Hawai'i), Ka Pakaukau, Ka Lahui Hawai'i, the Institute for the Advancement of Hawaiian Affairs (IAHA), and the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA). These organizations are at the forefront of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement today.

SOVEREIGNTY

Many writers essentially equate sovereignty with independence, the fundamental authority of a state to exercise its power without being subservient to any outside authority. Indeed, there is much to recommend the criterion of independence as the only one relevant in determining whether or not a state is fully sovereign.1
In Western political theory, French philosopher Jean Bodin is credited with initiating a "theory of sovereignty" in the 16th century.2 This was based on the rule of kings and queens in Europe who had exercised sovereignty as absolute authority or as a sign of divine origin. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 established the basis of the modern state system, as the concept of sovereignty became accepted as less than absolute and divine. Among nation-states today equally sovereign rights are at least implied under international law, while states pride themselves on their independence from each other.3 The principle of nonintervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign state is acknowledged in the United Nations Charter, which forbids other states and the U.N. from intervening "in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state . . ." The use of the term "sovereignty" is a common response when initiatives to limit a state's action or independence occurs.4 As the concept of sovereignty has evolved over the past centuries, independence is apparently the only form of sovereignty possible in today's international multi-state system.

The federal government of the United States exercises political and military authority over people living in Hawai'i today. However, a number of indigenous Hawaiians do not recognize the authority of the federal or state governments. Dennis Kanahele, leader of the Nation of Hawai'i, claims "the federal and state governments are illegal and invalid" with no jurisdiction over him or the members of his nation.5 The term "sovereignty" for the Nation of Hawai'i means "independence," which they proclaimed in January 1994 in joining "the World Community of States as an Independent and Sovereign Nation-State . . ."6

Ka Pakaukau, a coalition of organizations and individuals pursuing self-determination and independence, also equates sovereignty with independence. Ka Pakaukau "supports the sovereignty movement as long as the ultimate goal is independence."7 They are not a government. Kekuni Blaisdell is the leader of Ka Pakaukau and the Pro-Kanaka Maoli Independence Working Group. He is the convenor of the 1993 Peoples' International Tribunal, which brought the United States to trial for crimes against the Kanaka Maoli people.8 Ka Pakaukau defines sovereignty:

To be sovereign, in the Western definition, means to be independent, that is: not under the control, influence, or governance of others, being self-reliant, politically free and self-governing.
Ka Pakaukau identifies three main elements of our inherent sovereignty:
  1. ourselves, as a people with a distinct culture, language and spirituality;
  2. our lands, waters and other natural resources;
  3. our self-determined government controlling all internal and external affairs.9

In answering the question, "Is it meaningful to talk about different 'models' of sovereignty?" they note:

No, not if sovereignty is defined as independence. Various organizations have put forth so-called "models of sovereignty," which are actually forms of governance. Hui Na'auao distinguishes five different "models": 1) assimilation (status quo); 2) state-within-a-state; 3) nation-within-a-nation; 4) free association; and 5) full independence. Only people who are fully independent are truly sovereign.10
Ka Lahui Hawai'i, a Native initiative for Hawaiian self-government which claims a membership of 21,000 citizens, defines sovereignty as:
the ability of a people who share a common culture, religion, language, value system, and land base, to exercise control over their lands and lives, independent of other nations. In order for Native Hawaiian people to exercise control over their lives and land, they must be self-determined.11
Ka Lahui Hawai'i identifies four political arenas where sovereignty is applied as a political concept: 1) Native to Native; 2) Native to Nation/State; 3) The International Arena; and 4) Nation to Nation. Ka Lahui's work in these four arenas is essential to its plan for sovereignty.12

The state Office of Hawaiian Affairs, whose goal is "the betterment of conditions of all Hawaiians,"13 answers the following questions, "What is sovereignty?" "Is Hawaiian sovereignty different?":

Sovereignty is the right of a people to unite for the purpose of forming a government. Typically joined by a shared history, language, culture and values, such a government is empowered by its people to act on their behalf and to make decisions which affect community life.
Like our neighbors, native Hawaiians now express our sovereignty as citizens of the United States, of the state of Hawai'i, and of the county in which we live. However, as the indigenous or native people of Hawai'i, we have the inherent right to exercise a unique level of self-determination and to form another government. This inherent native right to exist and to decide those issues related to our future is recognized by both international and American law.14
Finally, the Institute for the Advancement of Hawaiian Affairs, organized to address different areas of Hawaiian issues and an advocate of independence, discusses the words "Hawaiian sovereignty":
"Hawaiian sovereignty" Those words are on the lips of people from across our community. They may be whispered or shouted, the contents of prayers, poetry and prophecies, themes in songs and speeches, lectures and sermons. The call for Hawaiian sovereignty is unavoidable in Hawai'i today. It will not be silenced. It will not slip quietly away. It is here to stay.
The call for Hawaiian sovereignty began 101 years ago with Queen Lili'uokalani. It has been carried by Hawaiian citizens throughout the generations, quietly at times, hidden at times, suppressed at times, boisterous at times. It has weathered many storms and has seen Hawai'i undergo a multitude of changes. But the basic demand and the moral, historical and political foundation remains the same--the right of a people and nation to self-determination.15
As independence leaders Kekuni Blaisdell and Poka Laenui (Hayden F. Burgess) have pointed out, most of the "models of sovereignty" advanced in the sovereignty movement are basically forms of self-government or degrees of autonomy, not "sovereignty" as understood in international law today. This applies to the "state-within-a-state," "nation-within-a-nation" and "free association" models. In international law sovereignty is understood among modern nation-states to mean independence. Thus, only the "full independence" model can be equated with sovereignty. Therefore, the phrase "models of self-government" will be primarily used in this thesis.

SELF-DETERMINATION

Self-determination
is an ancient political right that is cherished by every people. It connotes the right of a people to have a government of their choice. Both the American and French revolutions were based on the claim of this right and the desire of the people to be free from external or internal domination.16

All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.17

In the international arena, many agree that self-determination concerns "relieving a people from rule it opposes," although there is less agreement on the attainment of this principle and the collective "people" entitled to this right.18 When the United Nations was founded in 1945, nearly one-third of the world's population lived in dependent territories.19 The United Nations concern with dependent territories led to the inclusion of Chapter XI, Article 73, entitled, Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories, in the 1945 U.N. Charter. In December 1946, 72 territories were listed by the United Nations as Non-Self-Governing Territories, including the Territory of Hawai'i.20 The United States was Administering Power for the Territories of Alaska, American Samoa, Guam, Hawai'i, Panama Canal Zone, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Under Article 73, the Administering Powers were obligated to transmit information regularly to the U.N. Secretary General regarding the progress and conditions of the peoples of the Territories.21 The Administering Powers accepted as a "sacred trust" the obligation, in part:
a) to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;

b) to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement.22

The term "peoples" throughout U.N. resolutions refer to "colonial peoples," "peoples under colonial and alien domination," and "peoples subject to colonial exploitation."23 W. Ofuatey-Kodjoe affirms that in 1946:
Both Chapters XI and XII indicate that the signatories of the UN Charter recognized that the principle of self-determination should be applied to colonial peoples and that it was necessary to develop a system to supervise their development so that they can acquire the capacity for self-government.24
In 1959, the United States reported to the United Nations that Hawai'i had "attained a full measure of self-government," and Hawai'i was subsequently taken off the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.25 The U.N. ruled Hawai'i had "effectively exercised their right to self-determination . . ."26 However, other additional options for achieving self-government, e.g., through "free-association" or "independence," as outlined in United Nations Resolution 742 (VIII) of 1953, entitled, Factors which should be taken into account in deciding whether a Territory is or is not a Territory whose people have not yet attained a full measure of self-government, were not considered and presented to the voters of Hawai'i in the 1959 statehood plebiscite. Under Resolution 742 (VIII), the primary manner in which a territory exercised the "right of self-determination" and achieved self-government was through independence:
. . . the manner in which Territories referred to in Chapter XI of the Charter can become fully self-governing is primarily through the attainment of independence . . .27
The question posed to qualified voters by the United States in 1959 read: Shall Hawaii immediately be admitted into the Union as a State?28 Qualified voters included thousands of American citizens, eligible to vote with at least one year of residency, who had migrated to Hawai'i during the territorial period (1900-1959).29 Statehood was overwhelmingly chosen by voters in 1959. However, many indigenous Hawaiians did not participate in30 or support the plebiscite. For example on Ni'ihau, an island comprised predominantly of indigenous Hawaiians, voters rejected statehood. Even before 1959 Hawaiian opposition to statehood was apparent. In 1954,
the drivers of tourist buses, mostly Hawaiians and part Hawaiians, were filling their passengers full of antistatehood prejudice. The Hawaii Statehood Commission promptly issued an informative pamphlet to combat the insidious threat.31
In addition, only American citizens were allowed to participate in the plebiscite. Hawaiians who insisted on keeping their Hawaiian citizenship were not allowed to vote.32

Most voters in the 1959 plebiscite were apparently not the "peoples" the signatories of Chapter XI had in mind in 1946. As a result of the 1893 illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawai'i by "agents and citizens of the United States" (confirmed in the "Apology Bill"--Public Law 103-150), the overthrow deprived "the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination."33 Consequently, the Native Hawaiian population has never exercised its right of self-determination.

Some argue that as citizens of the Hawaiian nation in 1893 were of a multitude of races who remained loyal to the Queen and supported Hawaiian independence, the right of self-determination should be based on allegiance and loyalty to Hawai'i. In terms of Hawaiian citizenship, Poka Laenui of the IAHA

makes the forceful argument that when Hawai'i was invaded by the United States, Hawaiian citizenship was politically defined, not racially or culturally defined. While the vast majority of Hawaiian citizens were Native Hawaiians, citizenship was based on allegiance and loyalty to the place one considered his or her "homeland." Consequently, he suggests that in asserting self-determination, the "self"--or collective group--should not be solely the indigenous people of Hawai'i, but must include those who consider Hawai'i their homeland.34
Laenui identifies two distinct areas of international law in relationship to the principle of self-determination: 1) the rights of indigenous peoples, and 2) decolonization. He believes decolonization should be applied to Hawai'i as a whole since the Hawaiian "self"--those who "carried the ancestry, the history and the consciousness of the Hawaiian nation"--was replaced by an altered "self" (American citizens allowed to vote in 1959).35 Furthermore, the United States did not allow Hawai'i any real choice of "determination" by limiting the islands to remain a territory or to become a state. The additional options of achieving self-government as outlined in the United Nations Charter was unknown to most people in Hawai'i in 1959.36 Laenui stresses, ". . . Hawai'i was trapped into remaining under the domination of the United States."37

The special rights of indigenous peoples must also be protected in a future Hawaiian nation. According to Laenui such rights would include:

exclusive decision over further immigration from foreign lands (including the United States of America), foreign ownership of Hawaiian lands, international state protocol, selection of a symbolic head of state in the office of the Mo'i (King or Queen), programs affecting the cultural protection and development of the traditional culture, and prevention of any further diminishment of native Hawaiian rights in the general laws of the nation of Hawai'i.38
The IAHA defines self-determination:
The law of self-determination is clearly defined in present international law. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Furthermore, the United States of America is under an obligation to "promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations."39
The rights of indigenous peoples are universal and directly apply to indigenous Hawaiians. The International Labor Organization (ILO) and the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations (UNWGIP) are two organizations which have adopted principles applicable to indigenous peoples worldwide. In 1993, the Working Group proclaimed the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The "right of self-determination" is defined in Part I of the Declaration:
Indigenous peoples have the right of self-determination, in accordance with international law by virtue of which they may freely determine their political status and institutions and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. An integral part of this is the right to autonomy and self-government.40
Ka Lahui Hawai'i's 1995 Master Plan embraces the Declaration by the UNWGIP as the first comprehensive document which addresses the rights of indigenous peoples and sets new standards for the global indigenous community.41 Mililani Trask, Kia 'Aina (Governor) of Ka Lahui, points out that in the past most international documents have not referred to "Natives" as peoples but as "minorities." Minorities do not have rights to self-government.42 The Declaration affirms that all indigenous peoples have rights to self-government and self-determination. Ka Lahui Hawai'i defines self-determination:
Native Hawaiians and our descendants have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right, we are entitled to freely determine our political status and freely pursue our economic, social and cultural development.43
Two U.N. General Assembly Resolutions of 1960, the Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples, 1514 (XV), and Principles which should guide Members in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for under Article 73e of the Charter, 1541 (XV), have been instrumental in reaffirming a peoples right of self-determination. Again, the term "peoples" refers to "colonial peoples" and "peoples under colonial and alien domination."44 Part of Resolution 1514 (XV) declares that:
  1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.
  2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
  3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.45
Moreover, the principles listed under Resolution 1541 (XV) clarify Resolution 742 (VIII) in terms of identifying a territory in question and the manner in which self-government can be achieved:
Principle I : The authors of the Charter of the United Nations had in mind that Chapter XI should be applicable to territories which were then known to be of the colonial type. An obligation exists to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter in respect of such territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government.

Principle IV : Prima facie  there is an obligation to transmit information in respect of a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administering it.

Principle VI : A Non-Self-Governing Territory can be said to have reached a full measure of self-government by:


The reinscription of Hawai'i back onto the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories is one option being pursued by some Hawaiians today in asserting their right of self-determination. The precedent for Hawaiian reinscription is Kanaky (New Caledonia), which was taken off the list by the U.N. at France's request, but reinscribed in 1987. The Matignon Accords will be held in 1998, when the French territory will choose between independence or remaining a part of the Republic of France through a referendum on self-determination. Under the Accords, all registered voters in 1988 will be eligible to vote in 1998, including their descendants who reach the voting age by 1998.47

Some Hawaiian sovereignty organizations and leaders have been annually advocating the reinscription of Hawai'i at the United Nations. In pursuing this option, Hawai'i is afforded international recognition in its quest for sovereignty. Other options in exercising the right of self-determination may include proclaiming independence, as the Nation of Hawai'i did in 1994, seeking U.S. federal recognition in establishing an autonomous sovereign nation, as Ka Lahui Hawai'i is attempting to do, or choosing to remain integrated within the United States. Ka Lahui supports

the reinscription of Hawai'i on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Ka Lahui Hawai'i in its work to date has chosen to develop a culturally appropriate "separate system of self-government," which incorporates Hawaiian values and traditions and which sets forth the "cultural jurisdiction" of the Hawaiian Nation as provided by Part II of resolution 742. The Commonwealth and Free Association options under international law are essentially western forms of government which do not address or protect the rights of the indigenous peoples of the land.48
In reestablishing a nation, Ka Pakaukau advocates the international right of self-determination, using the 1960 Declaration (1514 XV) to define the term:
All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.49
Ka Pakaukau supports:
Reinscribing our homeland on the U.N. List of Non-Self-Governing Territories eligible for decolonization under article 73 of the U.N. Charter and 1960 U.N. Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.50
OHA's position on self-determination
is that the Hawaiian people have a right to self-determination, and that it is up to the Hawaiian people to decide what form of self-government they want.51
Also, the IAHA has been advocating the reinscription of Hawai'i at the United Nations for many years. Regarding Resolution 1514 (XV), Laenui recommends the U.N. Special Committee on Decolonization to "include Hawai'i on the list of non-self-governing territories to be decolonized."52

To conclude, the concepts of Hawaiian sovereignty and self-determination appear to closely relate to the Western notion of the terms. The principle of self-determination has become of great importance to the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. Many indigenous Hawaiians believe Hawai'i is a colony of the United States, and that they are still subject to colonial domination. The indigenous Hawaiian segment of the population in Hawai'i has never legitimately exercised its right of self-determination under international law. Indeed, the Apology Bill specifically refers to "Native Hawaiians" being deprived of their right of self-determination. There remains the question of whether non-Hawaiian citizens of the Hawaiian Kingdom were also subject to colonization. Furthermore, the legitimacy of the statehood plebiscite in 1959, used as a basis for establishing self-determination for Hawai'i, is questionable for four reasons: 1) the United States did not prepare Hawai'i for self-government, but merely integrated Hawai'i into the American Union as a state; 2) additional options for attaining self-government, e.g., through "free association" or "independence," were not considered and presented to voters in 1959, as outlined in the United Nations Charter; 3) the American settler population who migrated to Hawai'i during the territorial period (1900-1959) were not subject to "colonial and alien domination" by their own government and, therefore, did not have the legal right of self-determination in 1959 based on international law; and 4) U.S. military personnel stationed in Hawai'i should not have been granted "temporary residency" in order to vote in 1959.53

The Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement:
Roles of and Impacts on Non-Hawaiians

By Anthony Castanha, August 1996
<-- CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

GENERAL QUESTIONS

 CONTENTS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 CHAPTER 3
HISTORY OF HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY MOVEMENT		 -->

1 Hurst Hannum, Autonomy, Sovereignty, and Self-Determination: The Accommodation of Conflicting Rights, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1990, p. 15.
[return to text]

2 Jens Bartelson, A Genealogy of Sovereignty, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, p. 141.
[return to text]

3 C. Wilfred Jenks, as described in Hurst Hannum, Autonomy, Sovereignty and Self-Determination, p. 14.
[return to text]

4 Hannum, Autonomy, Sovereignty, and Self-Determination p. 14.
[return to text]

5 Mark Matsunaga, "Kanahele held for ignoring citation," Honolulu Advertiser, July 12, 1995.
[return to text]

6 Proclamation Restoring the Independence of the Sovereign Nation-State of Hawai'i, Honolulu: January 16, 1994.
[return to text]

7 Kekuni Blaisdell, on The Price of Paradise Radio Show, hosted by Randall W. Roth, Hawaii Public Radio, August 13, 1995.
[return to text]

8 The People's International Tribunal, "Introduction to the Verdict of the International People's Tribunal Hawai'i, August 1993," Ka Ho'okolokolonui Kanaka Maoli, October 1, 1995.
[return to text]

9 Ka Pakaukau, Ka Mana O Ka 'Aina (The Power of the Land), Newsletter of the Pro-Kanaka Maoli Independence Working Group, January 15, 1995.
[return to text]

10 Ibid.
[return to text]

11 Ka Lahui Hawai'i, A Compilation of Sovereignty Educational Materials, 1993, p. 2.
[return to text]

12 Ka Lahui Hawai'i, Ho'okupu a Ka Lahui Hawai'i: The Master Plan, 1995, pp. 12-13.
[return to text]

13 Office of Hawaiian Affairs, "Creation and Purpose of OHA," Fact Sheet July 1992.
[return to text]

14 Office of Hawaiian Affairs, "Questions and answers on sovereignty," Ka Wai Ola O OHA (Publication of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs), December 1994, p. 11.
[return to text]

15 Poka Laenui, Straight Talk on Hawaiian Sovereignty, Honolulu: Institute for the Advancement of Hawaiian Affairs, June 1994, p. ii.
[return to text]

16 Umozurike Oji Umozurike, Self-Determination in International Law, Connecticut: The Shoe String Press, Inc., 1972, p. xi.
[return to text]

17 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), December 14, 1960.
[return to text]

18 Werner Levi, Contemporary International Law: A Concise Introduction, Boulder/Oxford: Westview Press, 1991, p. 186.
[return to text]

19 United Nations, Everyone's United Nations, New York: United Nations Publications, 1979, p. 273.
[return to text]

20 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 66 (I), December 14, 1946.
[return to text]

21 United Nations Charter, Chapter XI, Article 73e, Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories, 1946.
[return to text]

22 Ibid., Article 73a and b.
[return to text]

23 Michla Pomerance, Self-Determination in Law and Practice, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1982, pp. 14-15.
[return to text]

24 W. Ofuatey-Kojoe, The Principle of Self-Determination in International Law, New York: Nellen Publishing Company, 1977, p. 105.
[return to text]

25 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1469 (XIV), Cessation of the transmission of information under Article 73e of the Charter in respect of Alaska and Hawaii, December 12, 1959.
[return to text]

26 Ibid.
[return to text]

27 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 742 (VIII), November 27, 1953.
[return to text]

28 Hawai'i Admission Act, Public Law 86-3, 73 Stat 4, March 18, 1959.
[return to text]

29 Laenui, Straight Talk on Hawaiian Sovereignty, p. 37.
[return to text]

30 The People's International Tribunal, "Introduction to the Verdict," p. 16.
[return to text]

31 Gavan Daws, Shoal of Time: A History of the Hawaiian Islands, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1974, p. 390.
[return to text]

32 Poka Laenui, Hawaiian Indigenous Rights, Decolonization & Democratic Ideals: A tough balancing act! Paper presented for Multi-Culturalism in Global Perspective Public Lecture Series, Program for Cultural Studies, East-West Center, Honolulu: July 1994, pp. 16-17.
[return to text]

33 Public Law 103-150, 103d Congress, Joint Resolution, November 23, 1993.
[return to text]

34 Quoted in Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie, Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook (Edited), Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation / Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 1991, p. 94.
[return to text]

35 Laenui, Hawaiian Indigenous Rights, Decolonization & Democratic Ideals, p. 16.
[return to text]

36 Ibid., p. 15.
[return to text]

37 Ibid., p. 17.
[return to text]

38 Ibid., p. 14.
[return to text]

39 Laenui, Straight Talk on Hawaiian Sovereignty, p. 4.
[return to text]

40 United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 1993.
[return to text]

41 Ka Lahui Hawai'i, The Master Plan, p. 17.
[return to text]

42 Mililani B. Trask, "Indigenous Peoples and International Law: Changing Times," The Master Plan, p. 18.
[return to text]

43 Ibid., p. 3.
[return to text]

44 Pomerance, Self-Determination in Law and Practice, pp. 14-15.
[return to text]

45 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), December 14, 1960.
[return to text]

46 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV), December 15, 1960.
[return to text]

47 Donna Winslow, "Kanaky: Mid-way Point to the Matignon Accords," Fourth World Bulletin, July 1994, pp. 13-14.
[return to text]

48 Ka Lahui Hawai'i, The Master Plan, p. 10.
[return to text]

49 Kekuni Blaisdell, Ka Pakaukau's Position Statements, July 15, 1993, p. 2.
[return to text]

50 Ibid., p. 7.
[return to text]

51 Office of Hawaiian Affairs, A pamphlet on the establishment and functions of OHA, A Publication of the Public Information Office, OHA, 1993, p. 4.
[return to text]

52 Poka Laenui, A Report to the People of Hawai'i via the Hawai'i State Legislature, Another View on the Subject of Hawaiian Sovereignty and Self-Determination, 1994, p. 16.
[return to text]

53 Jose Luis Morin, "Questions and Answers about Plebiscites and Decolonization," Unpublished paper, December 8, 1995, p. 2.
[return to text]

The Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement:
Roles of and Impacts on Non-Hawaiians

By Anthony Castanha, August 1996
<-- CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

GENERAL QUESTIONS

 CONTENTS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 CHAPTER 3
HISTORY OF HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY MOVEMENT		 -->