Papers by Karaitiana Taiuru
Māori Voices in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Landscape of Aotearoa New Zealand; An interim research report, 2024
This preliminary kaupapa Māori research has analysed the representation that Māori have in the Ne... more This preliminary kaupapa Māori research has analysed the representation that Māori have in the New Zealand AI commercial, industry and academic landscapes and looked at what voices and representation Māori have in this new and influential growth area.
Facial Recognition and Artificial Intelligence Profiling, 2024
This article was originally commissioned by Ngā Toki Whakarururanga for a general audience . For ... more This article was originally commissioned by Ngā Toki Whakarururanga for a general audience . For a Te Ao Māori perspective, refer to my 2020 article Māori Cultural considerations with Facial Recognition Technology in New Zealand .
Since the media attention in February 2024 that Foodstuffs North Island Limited‘s New World and PAK’nSAVE is trailing Facial Recognition Technology in supermarkets (Radio Waatea , Te Ao Māori News , RNZ ) in the following towns: Brookfield Tauranga, Hillcrest Rotorua, Whitiora Hamilton, Napier South, New Plymouth Central, Silverdale and Tamatea, Napier.
This article has been updated and made more applicable to the current situation.
This thought-provoking commentary delves into the intersection of te ao Māori and Artificial Inte... more This thought-provoking commentary delves into the intersection of te ao Māori and Artificial Intelligence (AI) regulation. While many Māori have expressed a desire for AI regulation, this post raises the point that doing so too soon could have unintended consequences. It’s important to consider the implications of AI regulation from a te ao Māori perspective. Let’s continue to explore this topic and ensure that any decisions made are well-informed and culturally respectful*.
Until only recently, commentators in the AI and regulation space have been bias against Māori perspectives due to no Māori voices being considered, a matter that has now significantly changed.
Importantly, it must be noted that Artificial Intelligence is not a new technology and talk of regulating it has only become a popular topic in recent years, likely due to the public release of ChatGPT. AI begun its developments in the 1940’s to 1960 with several pathways of technological development occurring that has led to what we now consider AI. Many consider that it was not till 1956 that AI as a concept was initialised by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw and Herbert Simon’s, Logic Theorist programme.
Two primary sets of research are analysed from a 2023 DataCom survey on business leaders use and the recent 2024 InternetNZ survey of New Zealand perceptions of online and AI . Also considered is research commissioned by The Law Foundation New Zealand and NetSafe research about online abuse that show Māori are more likely to be victims of online abuse in all of its forms.
In conclusion, an analysis of New Zealand legislation and legal frameworks, how they could impact AI regulation in New Zealand.
6 Te Tiriti Based Artificial Intelligence (AI) Ethical Principles by Karaitiana Taiuru, 2023
These peer reviewed principles were originally written by Dr Karaitiana Taiuru, to provide a Māor... more These peer reviewed principles were originally written by Dr Karaitiana Taiuru, to provide a Māori and Te Tiriti perspective on Artificial Intelligence with Health, complimenting the 'Principals section' written by Professor James Maclaurin-Te Whare Wānanga o Ōtākou | The University of Otago, for inclusion into the collaborative and peer reviewed report "Capturing the benefits of AI in the healthcare for Aotearoa New Zealand. A rapid response from the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor, Kaitohutohu Pūtaia Matua ki te Pirimia" i. The principles have been modified to be a general set of principles for all AI. Various specialised AI such as languages, legal, education, etc will need to modify these principles to make them applicable to the various AI.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi Principles for Robotics, 2023
A Te Tiriti o Waitangi framework of principles to assist robotics industry recognise Māori and Iwi.
Te Reo Māori The Māori Language revitalisation and adaption with AI, 2023
ChatGPT has become a household name for many, and is usually in the mainstream media each day. Th... more ChatGPT has become a household name for many, and is usually in the mainstream media each day. There has been very little discussion about ChatGPT and the risks and benefits to Indigenous languages, and in particular Māori language – the indigenous language of New Zealand.
ChatGPT and other Artificial Intelligence (AI) Language Learning Models (LLM’s) such as Microsoft AI-Bing, Google Bard and the many others have already in a short period of time proven that they can learn a language, produce outputs of a language and be used as a teaching and translation tool. This article discusses how the Māori language can benefit and grow through AI tools using ChatGPT as a focus.
This article also discusses intellectual property rights and dispel some myths associated with AI and languages, while explaining that AI can also colonise the Māori language if not co designed with Māori.
The authors early career started with Māori language revitalisation in 1997, with a speciality using digital technologies to record and promote the Māori language revitalisation and regional dialects – with great success including a number of software products and technologies that pioneered Māori language revitalisation.
In the late 1990′ there were a lot of scare mongering and ill-informed statements about technology and its use with Māori language revitalisation. The author is seeing and hearing the same discussions about AI and the Māori language.
International Journal of Network Security & Its Applications (IJNSA) , 2023
This paper argues for the consideration of a decentralized, open, interoperable identity framewor... more This paper argues for the consideration of a decentralized, open, interoperable identity framework as a secure, scalable, user-centered meta-platform capable of leveraging many aggregate network advantages and delivery options for education and healthcare providers. An overview of the shortfalls and vulnerabilities of the current Internet and systems for identity management is first explained, followed by a summary of the status of development and primary proponents of decentralized, blockchain-enabled, selfsovereign identification (SSI). An examination of the Key Event Receipt Infrastructure (KERI) open-source decentralized key management infrastructure (DKMI) and its primary root-of-trust in self-certifying identifiers (SCID) is evaluated. This paper recommends KERI for consideration as a potential metaplatform overlay and solution for both the education and health industries as a means of attaining their primary goal of being more user versus institution-centric in their core interactions and processes. Finally, some pathways for future research are recommended.
Maori Data Sovereignty Compilation, 2022
Māori Data Sovereignty has evolved over the past 5 years while commercial and government agencies... more Māori Data Sovereignty has evolved over the past 5 years while commercial and government agencies are now seeking solutions and information. This is a complication of all of the authors writings using only updated information.
Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti and Māori Ethics Guidelines for: AI, Algorithms, Data and IOT, 2020
These guidelines are primarily intended to be used by New Zealand government agencies/departments... more These guidelines are primarily intended to be used by New Zealand government agencies/departments and organisations engaging with digital projects involving New Zealand and Māori Data. There is a recommendation for an explicit Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti clause for any New Zealand government initiated and or procured Artificial Intelligence System, Algorithms and system that uses Māori Data.
Māori Culture Guidelines for Brand Owners and Marketing, 2021
This document provides an introduction to Māori cultural appropriation and some common methods to... more This document provides an introduction to Māori cultural appropriation and some common methods to avoid it. A number of well intentioned individuals and companies in New Zealand over the recent years have suffered brand damage and personal reputation damage in addition to causing significant conflict with Māori individuals and groups due to mistakes that could have been avoided with these guidelines.
Kaitiakitanga Māori Data Sovereignty Licences, 2021
This paper introduces six new licence to protect Maori Data and recognise Māori Data Sovereignty ... more This paper introduces six new licence to protect Maori Data and recognise Māori Data Sovereignty today and for the next 1000 years.
Māori Data Sovereignty principles are also updated to reflect Māori society and the Social Licence is reviewed as not appropriate for Māori and Indigenous Data.
Indigenising through Te Taha Wairua: AI, Algorithms, Data, Internet and IOT, 2021
Indigenises the Internet and the global digital eco-system which is often called the Web or digit... more Indigenises the Internet and the global digital eco-system which is often called the Web or digital network, and has been specifically written to assist with understanding Data sovereignty, Internet, systems, robotics, algorithms and Artificial Intelligence (AI) from a customary Māori perspective.
Policy Quarterly
Freshwater management has attracted more public and media attention in Canterbury than in any oth... more Freshwater management has attracted more public and media attention in Canterbury than in any other New Zealand region. Public interest peaked with the controversial 2010 dismissal of the elected regional council under special legislation (Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act 2010). For a range of views on these complex issues, we asked three people intimately involved in the process – elected councillor Lan Pham, appointed commissioner Tom Lambie and Ngäi Tahu cultural rights expert Karaitiana Taiuru – to contribute a short essay assessing the Canterbury Water Management Strategy.
Policy Quarterly
Freshwater management has attracted more public and media attention in Canterbury than in any oth... more Freshwater management has attracted more public and media attention in Canterbury than in any other New Zealand region. Public interest peaked with the controversial 2010 dismissal of the elected regional council under special legislation (Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act 2010). For a range of views on these complex issues, we asked three people intimately involved in the process – elected councillor Lan Pham, appointed commissioner Tom Lambie and Ngäi Tahu cultural rights expert Karaitiana Taiuru – to contribute a short essay assessing the Canterbury Water Management Strategy.
Expert Maori Cultural Commentary to the Law Commission DNA Recommendations In Criminal Investigations, 2021
At the end of November 2020, the Law Commission released a report on DNA samples in Criminal Inv... more At the end of November 2020, the Law Commission released a report on DNA samples in Criminal Investigations that made sweeping recommendations that included protecting Māori cultural rights and recognising Te Tiriti obligations. It recommended that the law governing the taking of DNA samples the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act (CIBS Act) be updated to reflect the latest scientific, cultural and technological advancements in biotechnology since the Act was written in 1995.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.
Expert Maori Cultural Commentary to the Law Commission DNA Recommendations In Criminal Investigations, 2021
At the end of November 2020, the Law Commission released a report on DNA samples in Criminal Inv... more At the end of November 2020, the Law Commission released a report on DNA samples in Criminal Investigations that made sweeping recommendations that included protecting Māori cultural rights and recognising Te Tiriti obligations. It recommended that the law governing the taking of DNA samples the Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act (CIBS Act) be updated to reflect the latest scientific, cultural and technological advancements in biotechnology since the Act was written in 1995.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.
Māori Cultural considerations with Facial Recognition Technology in New Zealand, 2020
Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti and Māori Ethics Guidelines for: AI, Algorithms, Data and IOT., 2020
Introduction to Tikanga Māori Considerations with Genomics, 2018
Discussion about traditional Maori customs and Genomic research. Includes a literature review.
Uploads
Papers by Karaitiana Taiuru
Since the media attention in February 2024 that Foodstuffs North Island Limited‘s New World and PAK’nSAVE is trailing Facial Recognition Technology in supermarkets (Radio Waatea , Te Ao Māori News , RNZ ) in the following towns: Brookfield Tauranga, Hillcrest Rotorua, Whitiora Hamilton, Napier South, New Plymouth Central, Silverdale and Tamatea, Napier.
This article has been updated and made more applicable to the current situation.
Until only recently, commentators in the AI and regulation space have been bias against Māori perspectives due to no Māori voices being considered, a matter that has now significantly changed.
Importantly, it must be noted that Artificial Intelligence is not a new technology and talk of regulating it has only become a popular topic in recent years, likely due to the public release of ChatGPT. AI begun its developments in the 1940’s to 1960 with several pathways of technological development occurring that has led to what we now consider AI. Many consider that it was not till 1956 that AI as a concept was initialised by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw and Herbert Simon’s, Logic Theorist programme.
Two primary sets of research are analysed from a 2023 DataCom survey on business leaders use and the recent 2024 InternetNZ survey of New Zealand perceptions of online and AI . Also considered is research commissioned by The Law Foundation New Zealand and NetSafe research about online abuse that show Māori are more likely to be victims of online abuse in all of its forms.
In conclusion, an analysis of New Zealand legislation and legal frameworks, how they could impact AI regulation in New Zealand.
ChatGPT and other Artificial Intelligence (AI) Language Learning Models (LLM’s) such as Microsoft AI-Bing, Google Bard and the many others have already in a short period of time proven that they can learn a language, produce outputs of a language and be used as a teaching and translation tool. This article discusses how the Māori language can benefit and grow through AI tools using ChatGPT as a focus.
This article also discusses intellectual property rights and dispel some myths associated with AI and languages, while explaining that AI can also colonise the Māori language if not co designed with Māori.
The authors early career started with Māori language revitalisation in 1997, with a speciality using digital technologies to record and promote the Māori language revitalisation and regional dialects – with great success including a number of software products and technologies that pioneered Māori language revitalisation.
In the late 1990′ there were a lot of scare mongering and ill-informed statements about technology and its use with Māori language revitalisation. The author is seeing and hearing the same discussions about AI and the Māori language.
Māori Data Sovereignty principles are also updated to reflect Māori society and the Social Licence is reviewed as not appropriate for Māori and Indigenous Data.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.
Since the media attention in February 2024 that Foodstuffs North Island Limited‘s New World and PAK’nSAVE is trailing Facial Recognition Technology in supermarkets (Radio Waatea , Te Ao Māori News , RNZ ) in the following towns: Brookfield Tauranga, Hillcrest Rotorua, Whitiora Hamilton, Napier South, New Plymouth Central, Silverdale and Tamatea, Napier.
This article has been updated and made more applicable to the current situation.
Until only recently, commentators in the AI and regulation space have been bias against Māori perspectives due to no Māori voices being considered, a matter that has now significantly changed.
Importantly, it must be noted that Artificial Intelligence is not a new technology and talk of regulating it has only become a popular topic in recent years, likely due to the public release of ChatGPT. AI begun its developments in the 1940’s to 1960 with several pathways of technological development occurring that has led to what we now consider AI. Many consider that it was not till 1956 that AI as a concept was initialised by Allen Newell, Cliff Shaw and Herbert Simon’s, Logic Theorist programme.
Two primary sets of research are analysed from a 2023 DataCom survey on business leaders use and the recent 2024 InternetNZ survey of New Zealand perceptions of online and AI . Also considered is research commissioned by The Law Foundation New Zealand and NetSafe research about online abuse that show Māori are more likely to be victims of online abuse in all of its forms.
In conclusion, an analysis of New Zealand legislation and legal frameworks, how they could impact AI regulation in New Zealand.
ChatGPT and other Artificial Intelligence (AI) Language Learning Models (LLM’s) such as Microsoft AI-Bing, Google Bard and the many others have already in a short period of time proven that they can learn a language, produce outputs of a language and be used as a teaching and translation tool. This article discusses how the Māori language can benefit and grow through AI tools using ChatGPT as a focus.
This article also discusses intellectual property rights and dispel some myths associated with AI and languages, while explaining that AI can also colonise the Māori language if not co designed with Māori.
The authors early career started with Māori language revitalisation in 1997, with a speciality using digital technologies to record and promote the Māori language revitalisation and regional dialects – with great success including a number of software products and technologies that pioneered Māori language revitalisation.
In the late 1990′ there were a lot of scare mongering and ill-informed statements about technology and its use with Māori language revitalisation. The author is seeing and hearing the same discussions about AI and the Māori language.
Māori Data Sovereignty principles are also updated to reflect Māori society and the Social Licence is reviewed as not appropriate for Māori and Indigenous Data.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.
I also note that the Law Commission used its Māori name first in the media releases and the report Te Aka Matua o te Ture | The Law Commission as a sign of what I believe is a genuine attempt to be more inclusive of Māori and combating the bias Māori face in the whole justice system.
To understand the significance of Māori DNA here is a short indigenised narrative. Māori DNA is no different than a whānau archive of all of your whānau memories, knowledge, genealogy, photos and everything else that a whānau collects over generations and usually protect and nurture. Or your marae with the images, carvings, history and people in it. Yet, society do not comprehend the significant risks of sharing or having DNA taken. There appears to be very little Maori media coverage of this social disease that is and will continue to impact Māori the most.
DNA contains identifiable information and data about a person’s entire genealogy dating back to the first human beings and atua, all of the individual’s intimate health, phycological, physical make up and much more information which is for ever increasing as technology evolves and finds more ways to analyze and store genetic data. Traditional Māori knowledge also states that a person’s body fluids could be used to put a curse on a person and their family. Likewise, DNA could be used to scientifically prove and possibly reverse makutu creating a new cultural issue.
Some of the key recommendations in the report for Māori include the recognition that DNA contains whakapapa which is considered a taonga, therefore the collection and use of DNA in criminal investigations also engages rights and obligations under the Treaty, including the right to exercise tino rangatiratanga.
The term “Informed Consent” plays a crucial role in the process of obtaining samples. Unfortunately the Law Commission recommendations do not go far enough in this instance. Ideally Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) should have been used. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right that pertains to indigenous peoples and is recognised in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which the New Zealand government is a signatory and aspires to be the first country in the world to develop and implement a declaration plan to measure our progress in addressing indigenous rights and interests.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent allows a person or collective to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. This is also embedded within the universal right to self-determination.