True World Order
Sovereign State of Nu Tireni & the Constitutional Paradox of New Zealand
“This is how colonialism works. It convinces us that the fallout from resistance is entirely our fault, that the immoral choice is resistance itself rather than the circumstances that demanded it.” — R.F. Kuang
A fascinating, obscure, and little understood document from 1835 provides many keys to unraveling the erosion of customary Rights of all Peoples around our world.
The Sovereign State of Nu Tireni
On October 28, 1835, at Waitangi, in what is now commonly known as New Zealand, or Aotearoa, the Land of the Long White Cloud, the Rangatira (chiefs) of the Native Hapu (tribes) of tangata whenua (People of the land), termed the common name “Maori” by the Europeans, proclaimed their Sovereign State. The document is the He wakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni, Proclamation of Sovereign State of the Chiefs of Nu Tireni (note, not New Zealand as is commonly misrepresented).
Some interpretations translate He wakaputanga as the Proclamation of Nu Tireni as a Collective of Sovereign States, as technically each Hapu constituted a Sovereign jurisdiction of its own for their rohe (territory). In effect this created a new Jurisdiction of Customary Law.
From an international lawful perspective, the establishment of Nu Tireni as Sovereign in 1835 represents one of the most significant and overlooked Constitutional developments in Pacific, and perhaps in modern world history.
Historical Development
The Sovereign foundation of Nu Tireni emerged from a sophisticated political organization that predated European contact. Ko te wakaminenga o nga Hapu [Congress] o Nu Tireni, established in 1807 by Te Pahi and other Rangatira (chiefs), had been meeting regularly across the northern regions of the Bay of Islands, Hokianga, Whangaroa, and Whangārei to manage what they called te ngaru (the wave) of foreign presence.
Ko te wakaminenga’s discussions culminated in He wakaputanga in 1835 — not a “Declaration of Independence” as commonly mischaracterized, but rather a formal Proclamation of existing Sovereign status. The English Crown’s recognition of this Sovereignty created the Constitutional foundation upon which Te Tiriti o Waitangi would later be agreed between Sovereign powers.
International Recognition
The formal recognition process began in 1834 with the selection of Te Kara (the Sovereign flag) by Ko te wakaminenga. This flag received formal international recognition with a 21-gun salute from the Royal Navy, recognising the Sovereign status of Nu Tireni in international law.
King William IV acknowledged Te Kara as Nu Tireni’s Sovereign flag and acknowledged the Congress’ “indisputable title to the soil and sovereignty”.
This Sovereign authority was vested explicitly in Ko te Kingitanga ko te mana i te wenua (Sovereign power and Authority in the Territories), residing exclusively with the respective Rangatira in their collective capacity. Thus was established Nu Tireni as a Sovereign State recognised under international law, with capacity to enter treaties.
Constitutional Framework
He wakaputanga, signed on October 28, 1835, formalized Nu Tireni’s Sovereign status through four key articles:
1. Proclamation of Nu Tireni as a recognised Sovereign State (collective of Sovereign Hapu).
2. Assertion that Ko te Kingitanga ko te mana i te wenua (Sovereign power and authority in the territory) resides exclusively with the respective Rangatira, upholding their Customary Law Jurisdiction.
3. Establishment of annual Congressional meetings at Waitangi.
4. Formation of a protective alliance with the English Crown.
There are many translations of this document, commonly called a “Declaration of Independence,” which it logically can’t be in international principles of law, as the Rangatira were already independent and Sovereign in their own right. Here is an interpretation gleaned from years of discussion with kaumatua (elders) by a collective of researchers. Remember, that in the Native tongue shall prevail, so this is an exercise in comprehension, with apologies for anything not comprehended clearly:
He wakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni 1835
cf. Proclamation of Sovereign State, Constitutional Order, Prior Right, Rule of Law, International Recognition and Peace Agreement.
Te Reo cf. English Interpretation, 28th August 2022.
[Bearing in mind the original document prevails all ways, and that interpretations may vary for each Hapu].
ARTICLE 1. [Proclamation of Sovereign State]. We the Sovereigns of the Peoples of Nu Tireni cf. New Territory, down to Hauraki, being assembled at Waitangi, in the northern area, on the 28th day of October 1835, Proclaim Our Sovereignty over Our substantive Territory, which We Publish and Proclaim is Sovereign Territory, constituted as “The Congress of Hapu of New Territory.”
ARTICLE 2. [Constitutional Order]. Absolute authority (Prior Right) and responsibility herein the Territories of the Congress of Nu Tireni is hereby Proclaimed to reside solely with We the Sovereigns, in Our collective capacity we will not permit any form of legislation or governance to be exercised within the said Territories of the Congress of New Territory, unless by persons appointed by Us, and acting under the authority of laws ratified by Us in Congress assembled.
ARTICLE 3. [Rule of Law] We the Sovereigns agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the Autumn of each year, for the ratification of laws, for the dispensing of justice, the preserving of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and We invite foreign Counsels to clear their water and consult with Us as to the wellbeing of Our Territory by joining with Us The Congress of New Territory.
ARTICLE 4. [International recognition and Peace Agreement]. We also agree to send a copy of Our Proclamation to the King of England, to thank him for his acknowledgment of Our Flag. In return for the support and protection We have shown, and will continue to show, to such of His subjects as have settled here, or come here to trade, We request that the King be Steward for Our young State, and Protector of Our Sovereignty.
Agreed to unanimously on this 28th day of October 1835, in the presence of the Resident of the King of England.
(Here follows the signatures or marks of thirty-five Chiefs or Heads of tribes, which form a fair representation of the tribes of Nu Tireni from the North Cape to the latitude of the Waihou [Thames] River.)
English witnesses:
(Signed) Henry Williams, Missionary, C.M.S.
George Clarke, C.M.S.
James R. Clendon, Merchant.
Gilbert Mair, Merchant.
Ti Tiriti o Waitangi vs The Treaty of Waitangi
Five years later this Sovereign State signed Te Tiriti o Waitangi, commonly called the Treaty of Waitangi, the gross mistranslations of which have overridden Native Rights and completely confused the true situation. Te Tiriti was a granting of the privilege of administrative governance to Victoria, Queen of England, over immigrants, under Common Law Jurisdiction, whilst guaranteeing the preservation of Native Customary Law Jurisdiction and Rights (tikanga) and Native Sovereignty.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi, was signed on February 6, 1840 at Waitangi between Rangatira and representatives of the English Crown.
The fundamental disparity between Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its purported English translation illustrates the Constitutional crisis at hand in New Zealand. Te Tiriti, signed by over 500 Rangatira (compared to only 40 who signed the English text), represents the legitimate agreement between these Sovereign powers. Of nine copies circulated for signing in 1840, only one was in English, demonstrating the primacy of the Maori text in the agreement process.
Critical differences between the texts reveal the true nature of the agreement. While the English version claims a cession of Sovereignty, Te Tiriti grants only kāwanatanga (governorship) — a limited authority for managing immigrants (Article 1) while Maori maintained their Ancestral Right of tino rangatiratanga (absolute authority) over their People, territories, and taonga (treasured possessions, both tangible and intangible) (Article 2).
While Article Three granted Maori the Rights and privileges of the Peoples of England, this was meant to supplement, not replace, their existing customary Sovereign Rights (tikanga).
Yet Te Tiriti has been and is promoted by the past and present government as the Rangatira ceding their Sovereignty. The New Zealand government’s Waitangi Tribunal, in their 2014 report, has conclusively found that the Rangatira absolutely did not cede, confirming what Rangatira have maintained since 1840. This retention of tino rangatiratanga aligns perfectly with He wakaputanga’s prior establishment of Nu Tireni as a Sovereign State.
As stated by Waitangi Tribunal manager Julie Tangaere: “Your tupuna [ancestors] did not give away their mana [power, Rights, standing] at Waitangi, at Waimate, at Mangungu. They did not cede their sovereignty. This is the truth you have been waiting a long time to hear”.
The protection of the Hapu from lawless settlers, stated in Te Tiriti’s preamble as a primary motivation for the Agreement, has been inverted through subsequent governmental actions. The current interpretation by the New Zealand government, operating without proper Constitutional authority from the English Crown, fundamentally misrepresents the original Agreement between Sovereign powers and continues to undermine the legitimate Constitutional foundation established by He wakaputanga and Te Tiriti.
Constitutional Implications
The Sovereign status established by He wakaputanga has never been refuted nor lawfully extinguished. Te Tiriti o Waitangi guaranteed continued rangatiratanga. The current situation, denying Native Sovereignty, presents several critical Human Rights issues.
The New Zealand government is not a direct treaty partner, having never properly received treaty partner status from the English Crown. The transition from English colonial administration to the current government structure occurred without any proper Constitutional process regarding Treaty obligations. The New Zealand government’s unilateral claim to Sovereignty lacks any lawful foundation under both international law and Te Tiriti.
Current Legal Standing
With the Waitangi Tribunal’s findings confirming that the Rangatira never ceded their Sovereign Rights, this creates an ongoing Constitutional contradiction — while the New Zealand government exercises de facto Sovereignty, it lacks the de jure Constitutional foundation for such as required under international law.
From an international law perspective, Nu Tireni remains a standing jurisdiction, never extinguished by agreement, law nor conquest. The transition from English colonial administration to the current New Zealand government structure occurred without any proper Constitutional process regarding Treaty obligations.
This Constitutional paradox explains the ongoing struggle of Maori to assert their guaranteed Sovereign Rights under both He wakaputanga and Te Tiriti. The resolution requires addressing fundamental issues of Sovereignty rather than merely adjusting existing governmental structures that lack proper Constitutional foundation.
The Sovereign State of Nu Tireni stands as a model for ancestral and Customary Rights and proper Constitutional processes in international law. Its establishment of a Jurisdiction of Customary Law is fully relevant to contemporary discussions of Sovereignty and self-determination being had by many Peoples around the world.
Hobson’s Proclamation, an Intentional Deception?
Lieutenant-Governor William Hobson’s May 1840 proclamation of British Sovereignty represents one of the most egregious breaches of diplomatic protocol and international law in Pacific history. While Te Tiriti copies were still circulating the territory gathering signatures, Hobson unilaterally declared British Sovereignty over all of “New-Zealand,” effectively dishonouring and unlawfully overriding the ongoing Treaty process. This premature proclamation directly violated his instructions from Lord Normanby to obtain “free and intelligent consent” from Maori Rangatira.
Hobson’s proclamation was particularly dishonourable given that many Rangatira had not yet seen Te Tiriti, while others had explicitly refused to sign. More significantly, this action betrayed the trust of those Rangatira who had signed Te Tiriti believing they were entering a Treaty Agreement with equal standing while retaining their rangatiratanga. His proclamation revealed the true intentions of certain powerful elements within the Crown — to acquire Sovereignty regardless of Maori consent — and marked the beginning of iniquitous systematic treaty violations that would follow on to the present day. This breach of diplomatic faith continues to have profound Constitutional implications, as it undermined the legitimate international Sovereign status of Nu Tireni established by He wakaputanga.
Constitutional Crisis
This fundamental Constitutional crisis lies at the heart of New Zealand’s current governmental structure. The New Zealand government is not in any way a proper Treaty partner, as Te Tiriti o Waitangi was signed between the Native Rangatira in their Sovereign capacity and the English Crown of Westminster. The government’s apparent assumption of Crown treaty obligations occurred without proper formal transfer of Sovereignty, creating a situation where even local government bodies explicitly lack Treaty partner status.
The transition from English Crown authority to New Zealand governmental control lacks proper Constitutional foundation. There was never a formal legal moment when the New Zealand government properly replaced the English Crown as Treaty partner. Instead, the government simply began acting as if it had complete Sovereignty without formal transfer of power, resulting in what legal scholars describe as a “fragmented or incoherent subject” in Treaty relationships. This unilateral assumption of authority violates fundamental principles of international law regarding the transfer of Sovereign powers, representing a significant breach of international law protocols.
Under international law and convention, treaties require a minimum of two Sovereign powers to be valid. The New Zealand government’s assumption of Treaty partner status without proper Constitutional process thus creates a profound legal paradox — while exercising de facto Sovereignty and making binding international agreements, it operates from an ambiguous unilateral constitutional standing regarding Treaty partnership. This situation raises serious questions about the de jure legitimacy of the New Zealand government and its assumption of Sovereign powers without proper constitutional transfer from the English Crown. The resolution of this Constitutional crisis requires addressing these fundamental issues rather than continuing to operate a belligerant occupancy under an assumed authority.
Treaty “Principles” vs International Law
A critical distinction must be made between Te Tiriti o Waitangi and what are commonly called “Treaty principles.” Te Tiriti, the original Maori text signed by most Rangatira, guarantees tino rangatiratanga (Sovereign Authority) and stands in honest interpretations of international law as the legitimate version (that in the Native tongue prevails). It builds directly upon He wakaputanga’s established Sovereign State of Nu Tireni and represents a formal agreement between two Sovereign powers. This document maintains its status as a valid international treaty, though its provisions have been systematically ignored.
In contrast, “Treaty principles” represent an attempt to “reconcile” Te Tiriti with the English text, resulting in what many describe as a “significantly watered-down version of Te Tiriti.” These “principles” were created to accommodate Crown claims of absolute Sovereignty while avoiding engagement with the actual meanings and obligations stated in Te Tiriti. The Waitangi Tribunal notes that these principles reflect “a disingenuous historical narrative.” This fundamental difference between Te Tiriti and Treaty principles illustrates how far current governmental approaches have diverged from the original constitutional foundation established by He wakaputanga and Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
Current political climate
The current political climate in New Zealand starkly illustrates the distance between constitutional reality and government policy. A proposed Treaty Principles Bill seeks to redefine the relationship between Crown and Maori, claiming that Sovereignty was ceded in 1840 and attempting to establish “equal rights” for all New Zealanders through parliamentary rather than judicial interpretation of Treaty articles. Maori MPs have led dramatic protests against this legislation, arguing it undermines fundamental Treaty relationships and violates partnership agreement, pointing to the 2014 Waitangi Tribunal findings that Sovereignty was never ceded.
However, this entire debate in Parliament operates on fundamentally flawed premises that ignore the Constitutional realities established by He wakaputanga and Te Tiriti. The New Zealand government, not being a direct Treaty partner and lacking any lawful transfer of Treaty partnership status from the English Crown, has no Constitutional authority to unilaterally redefine Treaty articles.
As the Waitangi Tribunal’s interim report on this concludes, the bill is “poorly designed, not informed by consultation with Maori, not justified by robust policy analysis, and risks destroying the very foundation of the constitutional arrangements of this country.” This legislative attempt to reshape Treaty relationships serves to highlight the profound Constitutional paradox at the heart of New Zealand’s governance — while exercising de facto Sovereignty, it lacks the de jure Constitutional foundation required under international law to make such fundamental changes to the Treaty relationship.
What it is?
Think of it like this, Nu Tireni is the organic Sovereign state, Aotearoa are the islands (though some dispute this name as customary), New Zealand is an out of order administrative realm. Nu Tireni was set to be a beachhead against the colonial march of the European powers, a place where customary Native rights are respected and protected. Yet the deceptions and double-crossings of the London “Crown” eventuated regardless. Nonetheless, this is a model for the entire world to learn from and make progress towards a more evolved society, once comprehended.
How this situation evolves depends on the actions of the all the People on those beautiful South Pacific islands. Shining a spotlight for the world to see certainly will facilitate progress.
For more information visit https://www.nutireni.io/
Your views and comments are most welcome!
Support Independent Research into Concealed Knowledge and Unexplored Horizons
Your engagement enables deep investigation into fundamental aspects of existence that mainstream academia often neglects. This work examines critical historical and scientific understanding through alternative perspectives.
🎯 Make a Direct Impact:
Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/alkemix
PayPal: paypal.me/alkemix33
Why Support?
Each contribution facilitates:
Investigation of overlooked historical evidence
Research into alternative scientific paradigms
Documentation of significant findings
Creation of original content that challenges conventional narratives
Whether you:
Share these insights with fellow researchers
Contribute to ongoing investigations
Engage in meaningful discourse
You're helping illuminate paths of knowledge that deserve deeper examination.
"The gift is to the giver, and comes back most to them" - Walt Whitman
Thank you for writing this up in a very clear and concise way.
It is most important that the historical facts be known so as to be able to restore power to those who rightly and by historical mandate are chosen to exercise it.
Good to know! Ty