Sovereignty backers go their own way

Hawai’i sovereignty groups striving for independence from the United States

won’t have anything to with federal legislation that proposes to formalize a

relationship between the country and Native Hawaiians.

Should the

legislation proposed by U.S. Sens. Daniel Akaka and Sen. Daniel Inouye of

Hawai’i become law, advocates for sovereignty say they will reject it.

The

sovereignty groups vow to continue to work for the day when the Hawaiian

kingdom will be reinstated and the kingdom can operate as a sovereign nation

able to negotiate and trade with world powers.

The advocates say the

Hawaiian nation remains intact, and that the overthrow of the monarchy in 1893

and the annexation of Hawaii to the U.S. was illegal.

The federal

legislation will not put a dent in their drive for control of their lands and

assets, they say.

“It doesn’t matter what” the federal government does

“because we are a government recognized by the world,” said Kaua’i independence

advocate Butch Kekahu. “Was there a queen? Was there an illegal

annexation?”

Some sovereignty advocates contend an international court case

being contested before the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague,

Netherlands can apply pressure for the ouster of the U.S. from Hawaii.

In

dispute is whether a Big Island resident, Lance Larsen, must obtain a state of

Hawai’i driver license to drive on state roads. He claims he doesn’t need one

because he is descended from ancestors who were subjects of the Hawaiian

kingdom.

A sovereignty group called Hawaiian Kindom is arguing before the

international court that it did its best to protect the man’s rights but could

not do so because of superseding laws imposed by the United States, said Keanu

Sai, a representative for the group.

Some sovereignty advocates say the

court case will bring to light that Hawai’i was once an independent nation that

had treaties with Great Britain, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Japan and

Samoa.

The court’s acknowledgment of that fact could motivate those

countries to institute economic sanctions against the United States or initiate

action in the international court to force the U.S. out of Hawai’i,

independence advocates say.

The current case before the international court

doesn’t address that issue, but the group’s next goal will probably be to ask

the court to “terminate” America’s hold over Hawai’i, Sai said.

He also

said the international case shows further the irrelevance of the Akaka

bill.

The legislation is before Congress, which is in extended session,

according to Sandy Skousen, press secretary for Inouye, who introduced the bill

in the Senate.

The House of Representatives recently approved a version of

the bill, introduced and supported, respectively, by Reps. Neil Abercrombie and

Patsy Mink of Hawai’i. It recognizes a relationship between Native Hawaiians

and the federal government.

James Torio, an Anahola resident running for a

state Office of Hawaiian Affairs board seat in next month’s general election,

said sovereignty advocates will struggle for independence even if the Akaka

bill passes.

The question of whether the federal bill will derail the drive

for independence should be taken up in a referendum, Torio said.

“The

question is complex,” he added.

Torio said he will “always vote for

independence for the Hawaiians.”

Some independence advocates believe there

is language in the bill that will result in the restoration of the monarchy.

But Michael Grace, a sovereignty advocate from Anahola, said those people

are off the mark.

“There is nothing in the bill that can help us, because

the bill is under the U.S. Constitution,” Grace said. “They can’t show me that

there is a possibility for Hawaiians to retake Hawai’i.”

If the bill

passes, it will divide the independence movement further, said Healani

Waiwai’ole, a Lihu’e resident who is running for an OHA board seat.

Federal officials who hosted hearings on Akaka’s bill on O’ahu in August

ignored the testimony of those who favor independence, Waiwai’ole said.

The

federal bill is a moot point because Hawai’i is already independent, said

Sondra Grace, another Anahola advocate for independence.

“Even if they pass

it, it won’t matter in the long run,” she said. “We really have to look at the

truth of what happened – the overthrow and everything that came after.”

Unlike other sovereignty groups who have talked about bringing back the

Hawaiian nation, Henry Noa, prime minister of Lawful Hawaiian Government

Nation, said his group has taken concrete steps over the last five years to

reach that goal.

Noa said his group’s legislature consists of a “House of

Nobles” and a “House of Representatives” which can carry out the laws that were

in place during the Hawaiian kingdom.

The legislative bodies represent the

48 districts that existed in the kingdom, he said. In addition, the executive

branch has been established, and steps are underway to establish the judicial

branch of the government under the group’s version of Hawaiian

government.

The government mirrors the framework that was in place before

the overthrow, Noa said.

Noa said the road to re-establishing the nation

could be easier if all independence groups worked together.

Ka Lahui

Hawai’i, Ka Pakaukau/Kanaka maoli Tribunal Komike, Native Hawaiian Convention

and the Nation of Hawaii are among sovereignty groups at the forefront of the

movement for independence.

“I don’t want to go against anybody in Hawai’i,”

Noa said. “We need to unite them through the proper process so that we all

benefit.”

Staff writer Lester Chang can be reached at 245-3681 (ext.

225) and[lchang@pulitzer.net]