It is important to note that the documentary depicts the struggles faced by the Maori people despite having the equivalent legal rights as their opponents. Although the indigenous tribe is lawfully protected, a clear disparity of power and legal favoring to their adversaries can be observed in the conflict. As usual, the wealthy and powerful showed an ability to bend the rules for their benefit. It has then been difficult for the Maori to have equal rights when the law supported them because the pact was the opposite of the Declaration of Independence. British law became a new paradigm, which was heavily inclined to benefit the industries and the new government. This novel legal framework did not match the cultural and ancestral values of the Maori people because they respected the natural world and always sought to live in harmony with their environment. It is the reason why they deeply respect the Whanganui River. A similar observation cannot be made for the British, who held individualistic views and separated nature from humans.
New Zealand’s case of disregard for the legal rights of the indigenous tribes is not unique. The United States had several equivalent cases where the rights of indigenous tribes have been disrespected or violated. The most recent example would be the Dakota Access Pipeline, where the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation and righteous land were subjected to corporate intrusion. The indigenous tribe states that “the Dakota Access Pipeline violates Article II of the Fort Laramie Treaty, which guarantees the “undisturbed use and occupation” of reservation lands surrounding the proposed location of the pipeline” (Lee, 2018, para. 2). In other words, the subjugation of the Maori people is not an isolated incident but rather a commonality across the world.
Reference
Lee, A. (2018). Treaties still matter: The Dakota Access Pipeline. Native Knowledge. Web.