euniting a Nation Disrupted by Treasonous Persons in the Hawaiian Islands
Replies to This Discussion
- Permalink Reply by on
- You, Nadine Aquino, Maile Kaleieha Kauakahi, David Schlesinger and 17 others like this.
Clare Apana Yes especially in the spirit of law there are outdated laws to be changed. Many good lawsstill exist. I have not heard of a better starting place or continuing place. I'm still voting for you.
Leith Anderson In principal only. The laws concerning this effort is complex specifically to stop redress.
Norman N Cookie Gaspar Absolutely with the amendments you spoke about Uncle Paka ~ there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
William Kapaku Jr An examination and comparison of Kingdom law with current law may find the following: some have been amended over time, some may have completely been rescinded and yes some are still there collecting limu...
Leilani Maui Ae!! That was my intention of this uniting our people. The Kingdom still exsist, all is needed is to Unite, live and perpetuate!! The Kingdom of Hawaii LIVES we just need to RISE her!!
- Permalink Reply by on
Kaylene Kauwila Sheldon I really hope women are able to vote in this...and hold a position as well, I think we all need to rexamine the Kingdom laws and all the Constitutions as well but most definitely we need to take those laws that we see fit and fair to guide the process, framework House of Nobles, not sure how effective but a fair and just process that includes the collective to work in harmony with each other as long as all of us know that the real chief is the 'Āina!
Tim Reis Yes, Hawaiian Law should guide the restoration of our government.
The creation of the 1864 Hawaiian Constitution and establishing a Constitutional Monarchy with Separation of Powers Doctrine is just one of the many great accomplishment of our kupuna in the 19th century.
It was the most advanced of Constitutions at the time and maybe today, in my opinion.
Another great thing about this Constitution is the wording "common good", referenced in Articles 4 & 13. When we talk about unity and inclusiveness, it was codefied in the Hawaiian Constitution.
I believe, everything we need to move forward is contained in that document. If something is missing, we can amend the Constitution by following Article 80.
Elaine Kauai, in another thread you asked about the 1887 Constitution. The 1887 would not survive a constitutional challenge as it did not meet the requirements under Article 80 to amend the Constitution.
This is truly a blessing to have a part in the formation of a government. It is a heavy responsibility and should not be taken lightly.
Ko'u mana'o
- Permalink Reply by on
- Permalink Reply by on
Lei Niheu Should Hawaiian kingdom law guide the process to restoration of our government....from my kikala and out my ways that Not having those kingdom law documents on hand, on principle alone I would say it is a logical place to begin a process towards that goal. I feel the intent of Hawaiian Kingdom Laws have foundational elements that can guide and shape our kanaka maoli population in today's society. Our lahui is blended into the racial, mix breed of our island society, often softening our political, cultural perspectives in accommodating ways that undermine the destiny of Aina aloha advocates for sovereignty towards political economic independence calling for restoration of the true and legitimate governing body of Hawaii. I must believe the integrity of Kingdom Governance and those laws are for the best interests of our Nation State: to perpetuate justice, a thriving economy, political freedom from corporate tyranny and industrial terrorism; increased lifespan and longevity of our Maoli culture, healthy & wise management our natural resources, waters, oceans and lands within our Kingdom. And most righteously, the health & wellbeing of Lahui Oiwi Maoli and all Lahui Haole Kamaaina/Malahini whom we embrace & accept, come into and be a the Hawaiian Nation as a whole, the Kingdom of Hawaii. With firm belief I hope these provisions are spirited within the constitutional laws of the Kingdom of Hawaii....I have no doubt that they do.- Tim Reis Elaine Kauai, if you Google Hawaiian Constitution 1864 you should find a couple sources.
You can find it at Hawaiiankingdom.org...See More 
Elaine Kauai Mahalo, Tim. I do know that prosecutors (in Hawaii) have the option to proceed or NOT. Whether that pertains to all alleged crimes or certain crimes that must be pursued, I am not sure.
- Permalink Reply by on
- Elaine Kauai Ok, I see that Article 80 is under military law/codes. When it was stated here ",, The 1887 would not survive a constitutional challenge as it did not meet the requirements under Article 80 to amend the Constitution." this means you will be looking to US military law/codes for compliance of constitutional amendment on a Hawaiian Kingdom Constitution?
- Tim Reis Elaine Kauai, I was referring to Article 80 of the 1864 Hawaiian Constitution regarding the lawful process of changing the Hawaiian Constitution.
- Elaine Kauai Ok, I searched Keanuʻs site and came up with military code for Article 80. I will look again.
- Elaine Kauai Aloha Tim Reis, with respect to the 1887 Constitution not meeting constitutional challenges due to lack of amendment provision, I found one: ARTICLE 47.
The Legislature has full power and authority to amend the Constitution as hereinafter provided; and from time to time to make all manner of wholesome laws, not repugnant to the Constitution.
- Permalink Reply by on
Sheldon Ah Yee Absolutely Hawaiian law was the first law of the Islands and has always been a more superior to that of a government that believes it can steal a heritage by force.- Tim Reis Elaine Kauai, we all get to believe what we want to believe. Article 47 that you cited, is that from the 1887 "Bayonet Constitution"?
Here is a little historical fact you may be unaware of.
The voter restrictions implemented in the 1887 " Bayonet Constitution are almost identical to what was imposed on the people who fought for American Independence from Britian, in 1776.
In severing their European ties their currencies suffered. The devaluation of currency resulted in foreclosures and not being able to vote.
The result was the "Sheas Rebellion"
It was the "Sheas Rebellion" that made the leaders of the colonies realize that they needed a stronger military, because they almost lost to the militias.
That forced the creation of the US Constitution.
A hundred years after the "Sheas Rebellion" they tried the same stunt on our kupuna.
There are people out there that want to start from the 1887 Constitution.
Deviating from a country's Constitution got us into this mess(US non compliance with the Executive Agreements).
Why would we follow the actions of the insurgents, knowing the end result?
You seem knowledgeable on the 1887 "Bayonet Constitution", does it contain the words " common good"?
Ko'u mana'o - Sheldon Ah Yee Common good for who? And fir what ideal purpose? That of our right to govern ourselves or for the rights of the USA to dictate what we teach and call government?
- Permalink Reply by on
- Elaine Kauai Aloha, Tim Reis, I was merely doing what is referred to as a little due diligence on your statements regarding the 1864 v 1887 constitutions. Staying on point, of the ability to amend the constitution and Article 80 which you stated is ONLY in the 1864, I am satisfied that I found an amendment Article in the 1887 as well. Thatʻs all, I like to confirm things. If you feel "these conversations are distractions" I wonʻt bog this thread down anymore with questions. E kala mai, I thought thatʻs what it was for and did not know everything had already been decided.
- Tim Reis Elaine Kauai, I genuinely was trying to help. I don't debate these issues to prove I am right and you are wrong. I debate them to learn. To test my perspective and my understanding of the issues.
In my previous comment, I mentioned the first step in this learning process is to acknowledge "I don't know what I am talking about and my perspective is defintely flawed". This applies to me, too.
Rigor is a good thing. We should be questioning everything but we should also be applying logic.
A nation can only have one governing document/Constitution/social contract. So it is either the 1864 or 1887.
In Hawaiian history, we see a genealogy of governing documents beginning with the Declaration of rights in 1839.
Followed by the 1840 Constitution, where Kauikeaouli willingly relinquished his absolute authority to create a Constitutional Monarchy.
Followed by the 1852 Constitution. In this Constitution, there was wording that allowed the King to change the Constitution, if he did not approve of it, Article 94. Article 45 allowed the king and kuhina nui to alter laws without legislative approval. Lot Kapuaiwa removed this " loophole", solidifying the Separation of Power Doctrine, creating Article 80 of the 1864 Constitution.
All of the changes to the previous Constitutions were lawful.
You come to the 1887 Constitution and there is a problem. It did not meet all the safeguards our Mo'i put in place. Article 47 of the 1887 "Bayonet constitution" completely removed the mo'i. Compromising the Separation of Powers Doctrine that they just created.
If you claiming to be Hawaiian (nationality) and talking about occupation, some things have already been decided.
But that is a different topic.
Ko'u mana'o
- Permalink Reply by on
- Elaine Kauai The fact is, the 1887 Constitution was in effect at the time of the illegal overthrow, thereby superseding the 1864 Constitution. I am not saying it is right or wrong just trying not to get into a lot of distractions but sticking to and stating facts.
Isaac Harp I appreciate this lively discussion on Hawaiian Kingdom Constitutions. The bottom line as some would say, is that we must abide by the most recent legitimate Constitution. The last duly ratified Constitution by the legitimate legislative assembly of the Hawaiian Kingdom is that of 1864. Aloha Elaine Kauai, like Tim Reis, I am not promoting any particular group but the link that he shared contains valuable information assembled by people who are widely recognized as well qualified to provide information and analysis. If you review the information shared about Hawaiian Kingdom Constitutions, you will see that the so-called 1887 Constitution did not obtain the consent nor ratification of the Legislative Assembly who had remained adjourned since October 16, 1886. Mahalo, Paka- Elaine Kauai Ok, more things to look into and study.
- Permalink Reply by on
Chuck Flaherty I believe the question should be amended before answering by adding, "and, if so, laws in effect at what date?". This question was discussed at last year's Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs plenary session within the context of which Kingdom of Hawaii constitution should be used as a basis from which to create a new constitution. This included the possibility of using the constitution that Queen Liliuokalani attempted to ratify, the fear of which caused American businessmen to instigate the overthrow in 1893.- Isaac Harp Aloha Chuck Flaherty, I believe that its a given that we need to follow the last legitimate laws, which have already been determined by recognized experts like keanu Sai and Williamson Chang to be the 1884 Compiled laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the last lawfully ratified Constitution of 1864. We cannot use any laws or Constitutions not lawfully ratified by the legislative assembly, and we cannot use prior laws or Constitutions. There really is no debate on what laws and Constitution we must abide by, unless you see some loophole that demonstrates otherwise. Do you? Mahalo, Paka
Joyclynn Costa The Kanawai yes
- Permalink Reply by on
- Isaac Harp Chuck, I just reread your post and need to ask, are you saying that the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs was planning to create a new Constitution for the Hawaiian Kingdom? If so, I hope you will inform them that they have no authority to do so. Only the Legislative Assembly of the Hawaiian Kingdom has the authority to amend our Constitution and laws. We are in the process of restoring the Legislative Assembly beginning with coming to agreement on the pono-lawful process to do so. Mahalo, Paka
Amelia Gora correction: The Constitution of 1852 was never abrogated. King Lunalilo did want the return or continuation of it and it continues.... see:http://maoliworld.ning.com/.../king-lunalilo-his-identity... one of the most important parts of the Constitution is that Hawaii was the first to ban slavery.... the U.S. didn't pass their anti-slavery law until after U.S. President Lincoln was assassinated or 1865 which was 13 years later!
MAOLIWORLD.NING.COM
- Permalink Reply by on
- Amelia Gora King Lunalilo was "the last of the Kamehameha's" seehttp://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/.../1900-05-12/ed-1/seq-9/\
- Amelia Gora the 1852 Constitution was not abrogated, the 1864 Constitution was added....read the following article:http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/.../1872-12-28/ed-1/seq-2/
- Isaac Harp Aloha Amelia, Mahalo for sharing about the never abrogated Constitution of 1852, What is your mana'o that we are recognizing the Constitution of 1864 and not 1852? Mahalo, Paka
- Permalink Reply by on
- Amelia Gora Hi Paka....the 1852 Constitution is still in effect... it appears that the 1864 Constitution was in place including the Manifesto of 1872 which King Lunalilo added included the 1852 Constitution because it was the intention of King Lunalilo to recognize it foremost. No supporters of the 1864 Constitution stepped forward in the meeting in the article, "equal rights and equal justice to all men" was the goal of King Lunalilo and utilizing Kamehameha III's Constitution of 1852 as shown in the article. So the "Manifesto of 1872" and the documented intention of King Lunalilo who was a Kamehameha being a younger step brother of Kamehameha III would be foremost. btw the land testimony of Charles Kanaina revealed that Kekauluohi/Auhea was Lunalilo's mother and his father was David Kamehameha who was the hanai of Kaahumanu. David was the son of Kinau, daughter of Kamehameha. Because the 1852 Constitution was not abrogated, it continues on. The Kalakaua Bayonnet Constitution was made under stress, duress, usurpation, and coercion and signed with a gun to his head...... and likewise with Queen Liliuokalani who did move to strip the haole of their control over the Alii.....and she did destroy the Constitution which made changes, thus, returning the Constitutional Monarchy government of her period to a Monarchy government which lawfully utilizes King Lunalilo's "Manifesto of 1872" with his intentions of utilizing the 1852 Constitution. Also a reminder that the permanent friendship and amity Treaty of 1850 of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America stands as the "supreme law of the land" as documented in the U.S. Constitution ..... This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any ... Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_ClauseWikipedia - Amelia Gora note that the only parties to the Treaty of 1850 is Kamehameha III his heirs and successors with the U.S. A. President.... King Lunalilo was a Kamehameha. His mother Kekauluohi/Auhea was married to Both Kamehameha and Kamehameha II - Liholiho the full brother of Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli. His mother stated that Lunalilo was the highest at the time and rightfully so because it was she who linked all the Kamehameha's families together and it was her son who was also a Kamehameha through genealogies, a hanai of Kamehameha's wife Kaahumanu who was also the only documented hanai. The Robert Wilcox family, a treasonous branch claimed after 1900 that their ancestor was a hanai of Kaahumanu but it is not recorded. Their ancestor Rives jumped ship after Kamehameha II - Liholiho died and was suspected of stealing the King's monies........Rives ended up in Mexico and died there abandoning the Royal Families return with the King's - Kamehameha II's body from England. See the list of the heirs and successors who are parties to the 1850 Treaty at http://theiolani.blogspot.com/.../vol-v-no-555-legal...
No comments:
Post a Comment