An indigenous lens into comparative law: The doctrine of discovery in the united states and new zealand
|Abstract||North America and New Zealand were colonized by England under an international legal principle that is known today as the Doctrine of Discovery. When Europeans set out to explore and exploit new lands in the fifteenth through the twentieth centuries, they justified their sovereign and property claims over these territories and the Indigenous people with the Discovery Doctrine. This legal principle was justified by religious and ethnocentric ideas of European and Christian superiority over the other cultures, religions, and races of the world. The Doctrine provided that newly-arrived Europeans automatically acquired property rights in the lands of Native people and gained political and commercial rights over the inhabitants. England was an avid supporter of the Doctrine and used it around the world. The English colonial governments and colonists in New Zealand and America, and later the American state and federal governments and New Zealand governments, all utilized Discovery and still use it today to exercise legal rights to Native lands and to control their Indigenous people. In this article, the authors, an American Indian and a New Zealand Maori, use a comparative law methodology to trace and compare the legal and historical application of Discovery in both countries. The evidence uncovered helps to explain the current state of United States Indian law and the New Zealand law relating to Maoris. While the countries did not apply the elements of Discovery in the exact same manner, and at the same time periods, the similarities of their use of Discovery are striking and not the least bit surprising since the Doctrine was English law. Viewing American and New Zealand history in light of the international law Doctrine of Discovery helps to expand one's knowledge of both countries and their Indigenous peoples.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Graham Oddie & Roy W. Perrett (eds.) (1992). Justice, Ethics, and New Zealand Society. Oxford University Press.
Joel H. Samuels & Jan Kleinheisterkamp, U.S. Report on Commercial Arbitration - the Impact of Uniform Law on National Law: Limits and Possibilities.
Andrew Sharp (1999). 'What If Value and Rights Lie Foundationally in Groups?' The Maori Case. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 2 (2):1-28.
N. Townsend (1996). Book Reviews : Voices for Justice: Church, Law and State in New Zealand, Edited by Jonathan Boston and Alan Cameron. Palmerston North, New Zealand, Dunmore Press,1994. 188 Pp. Pb. 8.95. [REVIEW] Studies in Christian Ethics 9 (1):52-56.
Susan Dodds (1998). Justice and Indigenous Land Rights. Inquiry 41 (2):187 – 205.
Mark F. N. Franke (2007). Self-Determination Versus the Determination of Self: A Critical Reading of the Colonial Ethics Inherent to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Journal of Global Ethics 3 (3):359 – 379.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #101,164 of 722,873 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,873 )
How can I increase my downloads?