Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 3, Number 7, 1 Iulai 1986 — June 13— BIack Friday for Hawaiians [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

June 13— BIack Friday for Hawaiians

By Moanikeala Akaka Trustee, Hawaii

Sad to report that the govemor vetoed our Hawaiian "Right to Sue" House Bill 2468 on Friday, June 13, whieh is a blow to a basic Hawaiian civil right that any Hawaii resident is afforded. The Governor's veto is a denial of democratic prineiple of due process. In this veto Ariyoshi in his

role as leader of the Democratic Party shows the party's laek of eoneem for Hawaiian justice. Ironic, since one of the reasons the Democratic Party arose was because of the need for minorities like the Japanese, to have a voice in government. I know because both my parents were active on the grass roots level at the inception of the Democratic Party in the early '50's. The feeble excuses Ariyoshi gave the Honolulu Advertiser as to why he vetoed this important "Right to Sue" bill was "shibai" to hide the fact that Ariyoshi as head of the Democratic Party does not want us natives to be compensated for what rightfully belongs to our people. The Ariyoshi veto overlooks why the Democrats eame into power in the first plaee; whereas, before the Japanese were oppressed, with this veto, Ariyoshi denies the Hawaiians who are still oppressed. This next election we must scrutinize and hold aecountable all cadidates. I'm not saying people should vote Republican; Fasi and Anderson have been no angels: remember it was they who allowed Hawaiians to be beaten and arrested at Waimanalo and Makapuu beaches on Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. We must examine individual candidates and see what they offer Hawaiian justice. I was told that at Nanakuli several weeks ago, John Waihee stated that he was against Hawaiian right to sue because he didn't want to be sued if he became Govemor. Because they have Hawaiian blood doesn't mean the candidate is for Hawaiian justice, so maka'ala! We live in a nation that relies upon the courts to decide issues rather than the consequent disruptions of our domestic tranquility. The denial of Hawaiian access to the state courts, whieh is the civilized means of resolving differences, eliminates this option, leaving only civil disobedience as the alternative. Let us not forget that these are the Hawaiian Islands, these islands were taken from us. Native people were promised recourse to judicial process to resolve differences between their lifestyle, and ambitions as opposed to the foreign ways and means imposed upon us. Perhaps, we have embraced these new ways too well. Lady Liberty must cringe ,to realize that the humble masses today include the native peoples of America. Ariyoshi's veto of this bill is a sign of poliheal ignorance for the Hawaiian people are in the midst of awakening concerns and an overdue eall for accountability from the United States of America and especially the Democratic Party of Hawaii whieh we Hawaiians were instrumental in founding. Well, Ariyoshi, what do Americans do when they have no access to the courts? Isn't this taxation without representation? Hawaiians have promises to keep to our aina, our tradition, our people and our future generations. This veto is unfortunate and potentially disastrous even volatile leaving the judicial process inaccessible to Hawaiians with legitimate claims upon this system. Ariyoshi's veto has short-circuited the process for Hawaiians. Now what are we to do? Shall we pull the plug and/or change the wiring? Denying the "Right to Sue" guarantees civil disobedience, what other a!ternatives are there? Ua mau ke ea o ka aina i ka pono. Malama pono.