These are a few postings regarding the “Na’i Aupuni” process, an attempt to bring about a “Native Hawaiian government”, which would operate within the US government, much like many Native American tribes operate within the US. No sovereignty, just a “nation within nation”, which, as I understand it, is no nation at all. I would term it, “Fake sovereignty”.
This is from the Kingdom of Hawai’i blog, and was an effort to get the court to pay notice to an absent party in the proceedings: The Kingdom of Hawai’i.
[Note: link to Exhibit 1.]
From: Ali`i Mana`o Nui Lanny Sinkin
The United States Department of Interior, the State of Hawai’i, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Akamai Foundation, and the Na’i Aupuni Foundation are all cooperating in an effort the extinguish the Kingdom through the Na’i Aupuni process and the Department of Interior Proposed Rule. See the recent email with the subject “The False Narrative.”
A group of individuals have filed suit challenging the Na’i Aupuni process as racially discriminatory or otherwise defective. None of these individuals claim to represent the Kingdom.
Yet the Kingdom has a significant interest in this litigation. The formation of the Native Hawaiian Government Entity will make completing the restoration of the Kingdom more difficult and change the relationship of a significant part of the Kingdom descendants with the United States. As the Department of Interior comments on the Proposed Rule state:
[T]he government-to-government relationship with the Native Hawaiian Governing Entity would have very different characteristics from the government-to-government relationship that formerly existed with the Kingdom of Hawaii.
There is a rule in law that says a court has jurisdiction over a matter only if all the parties having an interest in the matter are before the court. If there is a “necessary” and “indispensable” party and that party is not and cannot be made a part of the litigation, the case must be dismissed.
The Kingdom is absent from the Na’ Aupuni litigation. The Kingdom has interests in the litigation that are not represented. The Kingdom is a necessary and indispensable party. The King, as a sovereign, has not and will not subject the Kingdom to the jurisdiction of the United States Federal court. Under those circumstances, the case must be dismissed.
The Kingdom has filed a Notice of Absence of Necessary and Indispensable Party in the Na’i Aupuni case. We will update the network on any responses from the Court to that filing.