Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 00, Number 1, 1 June 1982 — Feature Of Kings And Queens [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Feature Of Kings And Queens

Whenever we hear of "sovereignty" probably the first thing that comes to mind are"kingsandqueens."Thereis a similar reaction with the word "reparations" as one ean imagine payments by a defeated country for damages caused during a war. But are those the images meant when people talk of reparations and sovereignty for Hawaiians? First of all we are only beginning to become aware and familiar with the ideas of reparations and sovereignty. These words are not familiar words to many. It was not too long ago when we first heard of them through the claims settlements of American Indians and Eskimos. Lawyers and politicians know what these words mean as well as those who tell the news. But, somewhere along the way a good explanation of how they use the word has been lacking. Two reports were prepared to examine and explain exactly what "reparations and sovereignty" are for Hawaiians, and were submitted by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to the Federal Native Hawaiian Study Commission. The reports reflected what OH A has heard at eommunity meetings, a special meeting of the OHA Board of Trustees, staff, members of OHA's Ad Hoe Committee on Reparations, and the results of a survey conducted by OHA with other Hawaiian organizations. Because of OHA's responsibilities as set by law, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs has taken the steps to address the question of a claims settlements. OHA has the responsibility to work toward the "betterment of the conditions" of native Hawaiians and Hawaiians, and to serve as the principle agency in the state addressing the concerns of all Hawaiians. In addition, OHA has been designated by state law as the agency to serve as "a receptacle for reparations." The reports present a historic background that led to the events of the overthrow, and also gives information about how Hawaiians value the land. Another purpose of the reports was to present suggestions and ideas of what a plan towards the goal of "reparations and sovereignty" might look like. The report states, "OHA strongly believes that no final plan for reparations should be formulated without significant input from and ultimate approval by the Hawaiian community." As for "kings and queens"and "payments" the reports suggest that we might be better off using different words like "restitution" instead of "reparations."The difference it says lies in the sense that restitution is the return to the rightful owner of something whieh has been illegally given

up or taken away. And looking at the historical events of the overthrow it appears this is the case or what is desired. However it also appears, at least for the time being, that "reparations" is going to be the word used. The idea of "sovereignty"stems from the overthrow of the native government and the annexation of Hawaii without a vote by Hawaiians to determine their own fate and the fate of the islands. In some ways the idea of "sovereignty" ean be understood by the past events of the Falkland Island War between Great Britain and Argentina. Both countries have claimed "sovereignty" over the islands. One calls it by one name and the other by a different name. What eaeh country wants is to have control over the islands through the administration of government and ownership. The Falkland islanders, for their part, have been seeking "self-determination" whieh is a right and ehanee for them to choose what side they want to go with. The basis for a claims settlement here is similar. In the reports the words used are "self-government" and "selfdetermination." To understand how such ideas would work in America the reports studied the model of Amenean Indian tribes. Their tribal governments are able to control their own destiny within the bounds of the Federal government. The reports found out that tribal governments ean establish a government through a eonstitutional and governing body; set membership qualifications; hold elections; used and dispose of funds and property; levy taxes within the area governed by the native government; enact laws regarding hunting, fishing, gathering, access and other traditional rights; and recognize and practice traditional customs. The reports also noted that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs already exercises some of the above, but also says, "OHA does not advocate complete adoption of the Indian sovereignty model" rather Indian tribal government provides a lot of idea for Hawaiians to discuss for future plans. In trying to figure out the options available for reparations the reports suggest that a longrange program of land acquisition be part of any reparations plan. In a survey conducted through KA WAI OLA, most people who responded preferred other forms of reparations than money itself. This, the report notes, shows that to the Hawaiian land is more than an eeonomie resource; it is a eultural and spiritual resource whieh cannot be replenished by money. And this would be a very real problem if there is to be compensation for land.

* Reparations or "restitution" have been sought by Hawaiians for almost ninety years by different means. The report says such an offer would be an honorable solution to a complex moral and legal story. It is hoped that suggestions and recommendations presented by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs will lead to a fair and just settlement. Native Hawaiian Study Commission Survey Report A survey questionnaire was included in a special edition of OHA's newspaper KA WAI OLA. The newspapers were mailed to approximately 34,000 households in the States of Hawaii where one or more OHA registered voters resides. An additional 4,000 newspapers were also distributed throughout the state by the OHA community information staff. Between April 16 and April 29, 1982, 1,916 completed surveys were returned to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. The largest percentage of respondents were in the 30-44 age group, and the median age of those individuals who responded were 45-54 age group. There were an equal number of male and female responses. The overwhelming majority of respondents (86.2%) felt that the United States government should formally acknowledge its role in the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy. There was overwhelming consensus (92.1%) that the Hawaiian people should receive some form of reparations or restitution, and the majority of respondents favored programs directly benefiting Hawaiians (63.4%). 59.4% favored land and money. In addition, 10.1% favored "other" forms of settlement, 9.8% favored land only, and 3.8% favored money only.