Tikanga is a similar system of law to many indigenous whose ways were sustainable and resulted in rich cultures (music, dance, art etc). Some Hapu are matriarchal and everyone within a Hapu is a valued member filling the position best suited to them in combination with that which is needed. This mitigates the influence of ego and sexist concerns. Tikanga is a restorative system of justice which is a big improvement over punishment to 3rd party as is presently.
Awesome clear lectures, thanks so much. I also read through the comments below thinking I would find some intellectual debate. As you said, "you cannot please everyone". I appreciate your excellent delivery of thought-provoking information.
I was a little disappointed that he didn't mention that the Sovereign has the ability to represent the public's will in government (which they otherwise have no legal way of doing). If the hypothetical scenario of co-ordinated tyranny between government branches were to occur, the public itself doesn't have any legal ability to reproach them, but the Sovereign provides the final check to the system and can take action to mend such a situation through actions such as dissolving parliament.
Common law was made by jury decision. Legislation does not become common law until it has been tested by jury trial. NZ was founded as a common law jurisdiction with imperial legislation as superior to any acts of parliament. That parliament has passed a constitution act claiming sovereignty is really a moot point. It is like demanding full inheritance before your parents death. It is not for them to decide.
Or are you suggesting that parliament has the legitimate right to force people to be represented and assign their natural sovereignty and birth rights over to them? Personally I do not recall giving parliament the right to allow foreigners to vote in our national elections (case in point). As this is the case and I am aware of the corporate dominance over red and blue parties I have no confidence nor desire to be governed by these roles which tend to allow corrupt behaviour.
To reduce this friction people are indoctrinated into espousing/professing whatever is desirable by those at the top. Those that can repeat the lies without question, act, impose and enforce these views on others are promoted into positions of so called authority and influence. Which draws us back to the fact which you raised - many impressionable minds are sitting listening to this guy repeat what he has been taught by the law society and BAR (foreign entity) to believe. Tut tut tut.
In addition, where is the mention of admiralty law? The distinction between the Crown and the royal line? The mention of our nations declaration of independence 1835? The clarification that the Doctrine of Discovery could not be applied to the North Island because the natives had translated a bible into their language.
Looks like a corporate trust, your right the govt want us to believe we are at the bottom and thats what most of the public believe, the public will always be at the top because the public is sovereign of the land and the govt are public servants
My arguments do withstand the test of independent investigation and are supported with irrefutable evidece. For example the lawful flag of out nation as recognised in 1834 and the declaration of independace 1835 (He Whakaputanga). I appreciate you asking if there is a practical alternative because there certainly is. In our land it is a system of lore called Tikanga. To restore principles above rules and to recognise that everyone is born equal under God.
Can we step back and look at the social and environmental degradation caused through continuance with the current system in the last less than 200 years? Is it logical to presume that such trends and such a way can continue forever? Or that the erodence of the common mans rights for privatised so called "authorities" acting in limited liability roles willl result in a just society?
Correction: punishment by 3rd parties without restoration of the harmed party. Yes Tikanga holds collectives responsible for restoration. This is the best form of crime prevention.
It is not me who is removing or censoring... I note that this channel did not accept a video evidencing the crown courts illegitimacy in NZ. Anyone that is interested look for "NZ fatal colony" in youtube.
In New Zealand the Parliament has sovereignty, this is an established fact. However, it gains Sovereignty by technically imposing a martial law declaration over the Confederacy of Tribes and the land and people that is held within in. The governance of parliament in Te Tiriti o Waitangi only extends to Private land and British residents (now New Zealanders), in order for Parliament to claim it has Sovereignty over all Maori in the Treaty of Waitangi it also has to allow te Tiriti into effect because they are both legally binding and draw Sovereign power from each other. By creating Parliamentary Sovereignty, it also means that the term Kawanatanga is a declaration of Martial law, as the Confederacy already had its Sovereignty established by the British crown in 1835, and this can be the only way in which to nullify Tino Rangatiratanga, as martial law governance is a legitimate form of governance (regardless of our personal feelings for it). New Zealand is a country that derives is power to govern from a country, which is itself as Parliament is but one of the Tribes of the Confederacy in regards to te Tiriti. This means that the act of colonization is continuous and is the mechanism with which Parliament derives its power, it is perpetually colonizing another Nation. New Zealand is a de jure confederacy, but a de facto unitary state.
If parliaments' right to govern NZ stems from the Treaty of Waitangi 1840 (a recognised fact) yet the so called treaty has already been adjudged a nullity then their acts and legislation are limited by the will / acceptance of the people in society. The in-congruence between parliamentary acts and the peoples will is the cause of social friction, protests and non-compliance. The few at the top recognise this which is why the wish to disarm the common man and beef up their enforcement means.
Some comments were deleted only to have spelling corrected and they were immediately re-entered... do not know why this is a big issue to you. As Geoffrey Palmer wrote in his book "unbridled power" regarding parliamentary sovereignty: "how did that happen?" it was a surprise to him and it would be a surprise to many. Tell me: how do you tie the English BOR to Aotearoa?
Democracy literally means "that the will of the people is supreme". Go check out law dictionaries if you have trouble believing this. While you are doing your researh remember that first in time is best in law. Modern definitions have been blurred but if you dig 5 minutes more you will find the truth.
Given that magistrates in the crown courts operation in NZ (what you would consider Judges) cannot refute that facts I have put forward I doubt a layman such as yourself could. I've watch more of this guys stuff online... he has probably convinced even himself of his claims. A good presenter, professor.... but is he professing the truth? Does it withstand the rigor of public and informed debate? Quite frankly you do not know if it does, maybe you are unwilling to find out like so many others
@ 02:52 is not ceremonial it actualy holds power and the laws of the royal styles and titles act apply and overide any legislation that contridicts those laws
Tikanga also uses Kawa wise ways to extract decisions from the people. These are usually thrashed out where all perspectives can be aired and weighted in the final decision. Thus it is transparent and there is accountability. These qualities are sadly lacking in todays "modern" democracies. Case in point the NDAA bill or TPA.
I said the treaty not Te Tiriti. I suggest you look at the meaning of the words tino rangitiratanga in Te Tiriti at the time of signing and you will find you've lost your argument right there. It is first in time best in law else why would you be quoting the Bill of Rights 1688.. now you are starting to contradict yourself! You are making weak arguments divorced from reality.
Jeffrey palmer repealed the NZ constitution Act 1852 in april 1986 and the nz 1986 constitution act is an act for parliamentarians not the peoples constitution
IN 1919 New Zealand signed on as one of the founding "Nations" to the league of Nations, the brain child of Woodrow Wilson and colonel House, the charter for the league of nations clearly stated that only sovereign nations could join and that the laws of one sovereign nation could not be implemented in another without treaty and ratification. New Zealand was not a sovereign nation at that time and did not hold a referendum in regard to joining, this meant that the moment pen hit paper for the league of nations all colonial laws that existed before became null and void, and there was no new laws, constitution and referendum held to gain public opinion in regard to this...
Greetings to you sir from Guyana. Very informative and great style of teaching... How can you not learn? Is this high school or tertiary level? I am obliged to say Guyana has adopted the Westminster style parliament comprising of 65 members. But I'm ashamed but nonetheless resolute to mention the current government (APNU/AFC) coalition argued that 65/2=34, that is to determine what's a majority in a no confidence motion vote back in December 2018. Our constitution says after the government has fallen in a NCM vote they must leave office after three months! A series of court battles ensued and they have lost even as the matter finally ended at the Caribbean Court of Justice(CCJ)- the equivalent of the privy council. General and Regional elections followed in March of this year and APNU AFC lost yet they remain as of today 29 June,2020 while the drama continues... That aside what's interesting you don't seem to have 'that kiwi' accent...
Beautiful video wishing to visit Canada basically to study politics to contribute in my country as I see Congo DRC future will be as Canada with two powerful international languages English and French but unfortunately I'm asylum seeker in South Africa for more than seventeen years holding it, right now I'm approaching 39 years birth day all my second age of youth in South Africa as slave what's the meaning of human rights they need to consider this as a crime against humanity I never commit any criminal offence the system on the ground make us be illegal immigrants it's shameful the where their abused the system now we become victims 😣😐
Lets see if its outrageous: a challenge to anyone of you to debate law and our countries history on the radio? Not even this guy would accept because he knows he is peddling fiction. A story pieced together to make 1+5+8 = 2
Perhaps you should listen to your own advice and also remember that there is more than one way and many different societies. I am not trying to force you into aligning with my way or join my society and I would respect it if people with your views would reciprocate this as a common courtesy. Again, this is where common law comes in as it holds all to the law in common. This system of yours with limited liability, judicial immunity and a lack of transparency produces the worst kind of anarchy
The Queen took an Oath to uphold gods laws (King James bible?). The ministers take an oath of allegiance to the Queen. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it (Deuteronomy 12:32). So it appears to me the ten commandments are all we need to live in peace. All the rest of the rules, statutes, parliament are all to do with contract which needs to be voluntary otherwise its null and void.Hence needing consent to operate.
Legislation is not law it's LAW. The treaty binds both the queen and Maori. Not the corporation known as nz government and Maori. But the queen and Maori if the ties are no more by the queen then all rights should go back to Maori who signed. Or even if you take the treaty away. The standing order He whakaputana still stands. That's why the system is unjust
My friend ! I wonder if u really believe in what u teach! No disrespect intended at all! There no legal or political term to name the name of system here.those things u mention are just formalities, the banks are the ultimate in power here! They have their tugs to use as police ,has nothing to do with nz police, they they are the judge ,jury and prosecuted. And believe me they are not only above the law but mock it by doing every unlawful act they presume nessecsry against anyone who have ever threaten their interests ! If u ever read this ,contact me I gladly show u in detail with proof ! U lose nothing ! And I am if not as superior in education as ur self ,but have learrned on the field .that costed my family , my psyche , and health. If u want to see the people who sponsor govt in action,and how far they want to go ! I promise to convince u in 30-40 mins ! Unless u want to live in matfix
Cheers bud. There's something to be said about the power of economics to influence the political / legal system. There is no denying this. Of course, there is more to life than economics and people are motivated by a mix of factors. You may wish to read about critical legal studies and commodity form theory of law; I suspect the critiques cohere with your worldview!
mohsenalattar1 that‘s true .I just feel lucky when i was in uni we did have proper lectures who practice law teaching all law papers，much more interesting back then. sad to see the uni standards nowadays.
Many of us have practiced law (a barrister myself) while many of my colleagues have not though this hardly discredits them as legal scholars. Law school is the academic stage of legal education and the aim is to develop jurists. The vocational stage of legal learning is more suited to lawyer-training. Even today the debate between which side should be privileged rages on. You might consider reading some of the articles in the Law Teacher journal.
These lectures are very usefully to me, i always have my books alongside youtube and earphones on my head to listen these simplified and easily understood lectures by @Mohsenalattar thanks brother
awesome teaching style! ! I understand these videos easier than from our law tutor lol. Thank you i havea clear understanding
same to me! he is absolutely well understood
Tikanga is a similar system of law to many indigenous whose ways were sustainable and resulted in rich cultures (music, dance, art etc). Some Hapu are matriarchal and everyone within a Hapu is a valued member filling the position best suited to them in combination with that which is needed. This mitigates the influence of ego and sexist concerns. Tikanga is a restorative system of justice which is a big improvement over punishment to 3rd party as is presently.
Awesome clear lectures, thanks so much. I also read through the comments below thinking I would find some intellectual debate. As you said, "you cannot please everyone". I appreciate your excellent delivery of thought-provoking information.
Best explanation I've found on youtube
I was a little disappointed that he didn't mention that the Sovereign has the ability to represent the public's will in government (which they otherwise have no legal way of doing). If the hypothetical scenario of co-ordinated tyranny between government branches were to occur, the public itself doesn't have any legal ability to reproach them, but the Sovereign provides the final check to the system and can take action to mend such a situation through actions such as dissolving parliament.
To late we are already infested with tyrants
Who's here in July 2020 lol we need help with this NOW
Our MPs have forgotten about the "People" .....too much infuence from Bankers Corporations
Common law was made by jury decision. Legislation does not become common law until it has been tested by jury trial. NZ was founded as a common law jurisdiction with imperial legislation as superior to any acts of parliament. That parliament has passed a constitution act claiming sovereignty is really a moot point. It is like demanding full inheritance before your parents death. It is not for them to decide.
soooo wish you were my lecturer this semester. really good vidz please post more for 121 :)
Wowwwww. You are the best teach ever. ❤
Or are you suggesting that parliament has the legitimate right to force people to be represented and assign their natural sovereignty and birth rights over to them? Personally I do not recall giving parliament the right to allow foreigners to vote in our national elections (case in point). As this is the case and I am aware of the corporate dominance over red and blue parties I have no confidence nor desire to be governed by these roles which tend to allow corrupt behaviour.
To reduce this friction people are indoctrinated into espousing/professing whatever is desirable by those at the top. Those that can repeat the lies without question, act, impose and enforce these views on others are promoted into positions of so called authority and influence. Which draws us back to the fact which you raised - many impressionable minds are sitting listening to this guy repeat what he has been taught by the law society and BAR (foreign entity) to believe. Tut tut tut.
Canadian uni student writing a paper on NZ justice system - your videos have saved my life! Much appreciated :)
Mohsen you are the man!!! Wish we had this when we did 121
In addition, where is the mention of admiralty law? The distinction between the Crown and the royal line? The mention of our nations declaration of independence 1835? The clarification that the Doctrine of Discovery could not be applied to the North Island because the natives had translated a bible into their language.
Thanks for taking the time to debate LomU99.
Looks like a corporate trust, your right the govt want us to believe we are at the bottom and thats what most of the public believe, the public will always be at the top because the public is sovereign of the land and the govt are public servants
My arguments do withstand the test of independent investigation and are supported with irrefutable evidece. For example the lawful flag of out nation as recognised in 1834 and the declaration of independace 1835 (He Whakaputanga).
I appreciate you asking if there is a practical alternative because there certainly is. In our land it is a system of lore called Tikanga. To restore principles above rules and to recognise that everyone is born equal under God.
Can we step back and look at the social and environmental degradation caused through continuance with the current system in the last less than 200 years? Is it logical to presume that such trends and such a way can continue forever? Or that the erodence of the common mans rights for privatised so called "authorities" acting in limited liability roles willl result in a just society?
Correction: punishment by 3rd parties without restoration of the harmed party. Yes Tikanga holds collectives responsible for restoration. This is the best form of crime prevention.
you are my favourite person today. Gracias.
He's at auckland uni
It is not me who is removing or censoring... I note that this channel did not accept a video evidencing the crown courts illegitimacy in NZ. Anyone that is interested look for "NZ fatal colony" in youtube.
I also must repeat my former question as it remains unanswered yet is pivotal to your argument: how do you tie the English BOR to Aotearoa?
He's talking about New Zealand here
In New Zealand the Parliament has sovereignty, this is an established fact. However, it gains Sovereignty by technically imposing a martial law declaration over the Confederacy of Tribes and the land and people that is held within in. The governance of parliament in Te Tiriti o Waitangi only extends to Private land and British residents (now New Zealanders), in order for Parliament to claim it has Sovereignty over all Maori in the Treaty of Waitangi it also has to allow te Tiriti into effect because they are both legally binding and draw Sovereign power from each other. By creating Parliamentary Sovereignty, it also means that the term Kawanatanga is a declaration of Martial law, as the Confederacy already had its Sovereignty established by the British crown in 1835, and this can be the only way in which to nullify Tino Rangatiratanga, as martial law governance is a legitimate form of governance (regardless of our personal feelings for it). New Zealand is a country that derives is power to govern from a country, which is itself as Parliament is but one of the Tribes of the Confederacy in regards to te Tiriti. This means that the act of colonization is continuous and is the mechanism with which Parliament derives its power, it is perpetually colonizing another Nation. New Zealand is a de jure confederacy, but a de facto unitary state.
Why is the American (or Canadian?) guy teaching NZ civics?
Um, perhaps because the Egyptian guy was a lecturer at the University of Auckland :)
If parliaments' right to govern NZ stems from the Treaty of Waitangi 1840 (a recognised fact) yet the so called treaty has already been adjudged a nullity then their acts and legislation are limited by the will / acceptance of the people in society. The in-congruence between parliamentary acts and the peoples will is the cause of social friction, protests and non-compliance. The few at the top recognise this which is why the wish to disarm the common man and beef up their enforcement means.
You were right.
based
Wonder if he's watched Bill Turner on "the law and you"
Some comments were deleted only to have spelling corrected and they were immediately re-entered... do not know why this is a big issue to you. As Geoffrey Palmer wrote in his book "unbridled power" regarding parliamentary sovereignty: "how did that happen?" it was a surprise to him and it would be a surprise to many. Tell me: how do you tie the English BOR to Aotearoa?
Democracy literally means "that the will of the people is supreme". Go check out law dictionaries if you have trouble believing this. While you are doing your researh remember that first in time is best in law. Modern definitions have been blurred but if you dig 5 minutes more you will find the truth.
Thx for making the relationship/ separation topic so easy to understand 😊
Given that magistrates in the crown courts operation in NZ (what you would consider Judges) cannot refute that facts I have put forward I doubt a layman such as yourself could. I've watch more of this guys stuff online... he has probably convinced even himself of his claims. A good presenter, professor.... but is he professing the truth? Does it withstand the rigor of public and informed debate? Quite frankly you do not know if it does, maybe you are unwilling to find out like so many others
looking forward to watching this, thanks !
@ 02:52 is not ceremonial it actualy holds power and the laws of the royal styles and titles act apply and overide any legislation that contridicts those laws
Tikanga also uses Kawa wise ways to extract decisions from the people. These are usually thrashed out where all perspectives can be aired and weighted in the final decision. Thus it is transparent and there is accountability. These qualities are sadly lacking in todays "modern" democracies. Case in point the NDAA bill or TPA.
I said the treaty not Te Tiriti. I suggest you look at the meaning of the words tino rangitiratanga in Te Tiriti at the time of signing and you will find you've lost your argument right there.
It is first in time best in law else why would you be quoting the Bill of Rights 1688.. now you are starting to contradict yourself!
You are making weak arguments divorced from reality.
@Officer Barbrady another poorly informed scared racists saying go get an education 😂 if you can't prove it wrong you turn to insults typical racist
Also your dates are a little tricky see Chris trotter quotes for what I mean
Watching this while I study.
i do the same and it 's helped me alot
Jeffrey palmer repealed the NZ constitution Act 1852 in april 1986 and the nz 1986 constitution act is an act for parliamentarians not the peoples constitution
IN 1919 New Zealand signed on as one of the founding "Nations" to the league of Nations, the brain child of Woodrow Wilson and colonel House, the charter for the league of nations clearly stated that only sovereign nations could join and that the laws of one sovereign nation could not be implemented in another without treaty and ratification.
New Zealand was not a sovereign nation at that time and did not hold a referendum in regard to joining, this meant that the moment pen hit paper for the league of nations all colonial laws that existed before became null and void, and there was no new laws, constitution and referendum held to gain public opinion in regard to this...
its really good and well explained
top stuff... breaks it down well, making it sound simple. what uni are u at?
All you best in there
Care to debate some of your interpretations sometime? The history you present is oversimplified and misses key information.
Greetings to you sir from Guyana. Very informative and great style of teaching... How can you not learn? Is this high school or tertiary level?
I am obliged to say Guyana has adopted the Westminster style parliament comprising of 65 members. But I'm ashamed but nonetheless resolute to mention the current government (APNU/AFC) coalition argued that 65/2=34, that is to determine what's a majority in a no confidence motion vote back in December 2018. Our constitution says after the government has fallen in a NCM vote they must leave office after three months! A series of court battles ensued and they have lost even as the matter finally ended at the Caribbean Court of Justice(CCJ)- the equivalent of the privy council. General and Regional elections followed in March of this year and APNU AFC lost yet they remain as of today 29 June,2020 while the drama continues...
That aside what's interesting you don't seem to have 'that kiwi' accent...
not sure where he comes from
Life saver man
Where can I learn this stuff in a classroom? Just 121 stuff
Beautiful video wishing to visit Canada basically to study politics to contribute in my country as I see Congo DRC future will be as Canada with two powerful international languages English and French but unfortunately I'm asylum seeker in South Africa for more than seventeen years holding it, right now I'm approaching 39 years birth day all my second age of youth in South Africa as slave what's the meaning of human rights they need to consider this as a crime against humanity I never commit any criminal offence the system on the ground make us be illegal immigrants it's shameful the where their abused the system now we become victims 😣😐
Please state your source
Very nicely explained sir
The best way to describe the present new zealand govt is short and concise- Stalinism.
do you know how crime as a concept appears in the new zeland legal system
Lets see if its outrageous: a challenge to anyone of you to debate law and our countries history on the radio? Not even this guy would accept because he knows he is peddling fiction. A story pieced together to make 1+5+8 = 2
Perhaps you should listen to your own advice and also remember that there is more than one way and many different societies. I am not trying to force you into aligning with my way or join my society and I would respect it if people with your views would reciprocate this as a common courtesy. Again, this is where common law comes in as it holds all to the law in common. This system of yours with limited liability, judicial immunity and a lack of transparency produces the worst kind of anarchy
I totally get it!
Outstanding! Keep up the great work and I'm sure you'll fly through the course.
The Queen took an Oath to uphold gods laws (King James bible?). The ministers take an oath of allegiance to the Queen. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it (Deuteronomy 12:32). So it appears to me the ten commandments are all we need to live in peace. All the rest of the rules, statutes, parliament are all to do with contract which needs to be voluntary otherwise its null and void.Hence needing consent to operate.
Legislation is not law it's LAW. The treaty binds both the queen and Maori. Not the corporation known as nz government and Maori. But the queen and Maori if the ties are no more by the queen then all rights should go back to Maori who signed. Or even if you take the treaty away. The standing order He whakaputana still stands. That's why the system is unjust
and btw our system rules its so simple!
Thankyou!
What about the true sovereigns the United Tribes of New zealand
NO
@@conorhowells7306 YES he whakaputanga and te tiriti reaffirm this
I only find History and Law interesting if I search for it. Otherwise everything is utterly senseless and boring.
Originally Egyptian, but yeah grew up in Canada.
NZs way of governing..let the criminal do whatever they basically want and if we fight back WE get punished NOT them
Bang on Woolly!
We need to do away with law, meow meow.
Live like the cat, meow meow!
I wanna marry you I love your classes so much. I wish I could take them irl.
Except natural law or gods law
My friend ! I wonder if u really believe in what u teach! No disrespect intended at all! There no legal or political term to name the name of system here.those things u mention are just formalities, the banks are the ultimate in power here! They have their tugs to use as police ,has nothing to do with nz police, they they are the judge ,jury and prosecuted. And believe me they are not only above the law but mock it by doing every unlawful act they presume nessecsry against anyone who have ever threaten their interests ! If u ever read this ,contact me I gladly show u in detail with proof ! U lose nothing ! And I am if not as superior in education as ur self ,but have learrned on the field .that costed my family , my psyche , and health. If u want to see the people who sponsor govt in action,and how far they want to go ! I promise to convince u in 30-40 mins ! Unless u want to live in matfix
Cheers bud. There's something to be said about the power of economics to influence the political / legal system. There is no denying this. Of course, there is more to life than economics and people are motivated by a mix of factors.
You may wish to read about critical legal studies and commodity form theory of law; I suspect the critiques cohere with your worldview!
I thought I was clicking on new information……hmmmmm nah kiwis should know this shit. And if you don’t find out.
Thank you but your wasting your time , this lecture though i am sure you mean well , it does nothing to stop peoples suffering.rob.
dont tell me this is from UoA . i had much better lecture.
Can't please all the people all the time...
mohsenalattar1 that‘s true .I just feel lucky when i was in uni we did have proper lectures who practice law teaching all law papers，much more interesting back then. sad to see the uni standards nowadays.
Many of us have practiced law (a barrister myself) while many of my colleagues have not though this hardly discredits them as legal scholars. Law school is the academic stage of legal education and the aim is to develop jurists. The vocational stage of legal learning is more suited to lawyer-training. Even today the debate between which side should be privileged rages on. You might consider reading some of the articles in the Law Teacher journal.
These lectures are very usefully to me, i always have my books alongside youtube and earphones on my head to listen these simplified and easily understood lectures by @Mohsenalattar thanks brother
I'm happy to hear this brother. Thanks for the positive feedback!
people use our situation in law and study because its robust, unique and successful, stop being racist loosers!!
LOL sounds like your preaching.