january 2005

HAWAII
Law expert Francis Boyle urges natives to take back Hawaii

Professor Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois. He is the legal representative of the Republic of Chechnya and founder and head of a group trying to impeach President Bush for an attempt to "impose a police state and a military dictatorship" on the United States.

Although he was born, raised, educated and is employed in the United
States, Boyle has taken citizenship in Ireland.
Three newspaper reports below give the essentials of Professor |Boyle's speeches on tour of the islands.


West Hawaii Today - December 30, 2004
http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/articles/2004/12/30/local/local09.prt
By Carolyn Lucas

International law expert Francis Boyle walked hastily into Kona Outdoor
Circle Wednesday morning. About 60 people waited patiently in their seats to hear his three-hour' speech, "The Restoration of Hawaii's Independence." Most favored the perspective of Nation of Hawaii and Hui Aloha Aina -- Na Wahine O Puna sponsors -- "He just makes sense."

Boyle said the United States conceded it unlawfully occupied the Kingdom of Hawaii and has done so for more than 111 years. That fact alone, he added, "gives the Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) the entitlement to restore their independent status as a sovereign nation state."

To do this, Boyle urged the people to make an "educated" choice on whether they wanted to approve the Akaka Bill(see below), which seeks federal recognition for Native Hawaiians.

A man in a blue baseball cap stood up and asked Boyle if the Akaka Bill
should be shot, chopped or passed.

"I'm just a lawyer," Boyle responded. "I just provide advice, counsel and
representation. You have to decide."

The audience waited for the man's decision. "I already told them to chop it," the man said, slicing through the air with
his right hand.

The bill's proponents said it allows for self-determination in government. Boyle disagreed, warning the audience to pay attention to the bill's "carefully chosen" phrases. In the beginning, he said, the bill promises "a governing entity," not a government. Boyle, who served as counsel for the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Provision Government of the State of Palestine, defined entity as it was used in the negotiations between Israel and Palestine. "They offered entity to demonstrate utmost disrespect," he said. "It was the very bottom level of respect to use 'government' as an adjective."

Boyle rhetorically asked if Native Hawaiians needed legislation, permission or approval from the U.S. government to be a self-governance.
Under the U.N. Charter, Article 73, Boyle said the United States is
"obligated to bring about self-government of people within territories
deemed non-self governing." Hawaii was once designated as a territory, but was removed from the U.N. list of Non-self Governing Peoples, after becoming a U.S. state in 1959.

Boyle then mentioned the Palestinians, who in 1988 decided on their own to "unilaterally proclaim their own state, in a declaration of independence. This eventually led to the Palestinian state being recognized today by 125 nation states in the world."

He said Native Hawaiians, like the Palestinians, are striving for "their right of self-determination," which is afforded to them by the U.N. Charter, Article 1. It states, "The purpose of the United Nations is to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace."

Boyle further suggested the audience "exercise their right of self-determination," instead of asking the permission of the U.S. Congress to declare their independence. To create an independent state, territory, population, government and international relations must exist.

Hawaii already has a fixed territory -- the Hawaiian Archipelago -- and a
population of distinguishable people -- the Native Hawaiians, who trace
their ancestry back before the Europeans' appearance on the lands.

Government, Boyle said, is in the kupuna council, but how the people are
governed has yet to be organized. He added, "You don't need a government along the lines of a federal government of the United States or the State of Hawaii to have a government."

Boyle said Hawaii also need the capacity to "enter into international relations, to deal with other states, and to keep your commitments," which meant establishing diplomatic relations as an independent state.
He did not know how long this creation would take, what the consequences would be or how many states would recognize Hawaii. However, Boyle said "the plight of the Hawaiian people is generally well known in the world and there's a great deal of sympathy."

He ended his speech, saying "Hawaii should send the strongest message to Washington it can. Letters carry no weight. The number of people in the street do. Ghandi threw the mighty British out of India with peaceful,
nonviolent force. People power, submit to it."

Copyright (c) West Hawaii Today, 1997 - 2004

akaka Bill
Federal recognition requires that the Native Hawaiian government and economy adhere to American values, laws, and culture as embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

Exactly what kind of economy do the people of Hawai‘i, both native and non-native, envision for a Native Hawaiian government? What are the sources of revenue that will support the programs, services and operations of a Native Hawaiian nation? Should a Native Hawaiian government be dependent on federal and state funding, generate its own revenues through government-owned businesses, or raise revenues through taxation and fees? How would citizens and members of a Hawaiian nation participate in the economic structure of the domestic-dependent nation ? Would they be entrepreneurs, workers, or merely beneficiaries?
Once the political foundations have been laid, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to change the economic system. Rushing into a dependent-status relationship with the United States without a clear understanding of the inherent limitations on the economic structure of that relationship is foolhardy.
There are approximately 332 Native American tribes and 229 Alaska Native villages that are already federally recognized; their varied experiences serve as models of what Native Hawaiians can expect for their government and economy. While domestic-dependent status affirms the political relationship between indigenous peoples and U.S. federal government, it also severely constrains the economic possibilities.
Land
The lands of federally recognized Native American tribal nations in the 48 contiguous states are held in trust by the U.S. federal government. Title transfers of these lands are subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior. This means that trust lands held by the U.S. federal government cannot be mortgaged (much like Hawaiian Homelands), creating significant impediments to investors looking to secure their investments. Thus, most investors will refuse to invest in any business operations or activities conducted on native trust lands. Ultimately, absent government loan or loan-guarantee programs, individual Native Hawaiians trying to start businesses on these trust lands would find it difficult to secure financing.
Economic development on Native Hawaiian trust lands would be heavily dependent upon government funding and support. Priorities for economic development would be set according to political concerns which may not reflect economic realities or efficiency. Even in the best-case situation with little or no political interference, government agencies are not able to move as swiftly or efficiently as commercial financing agencies to provide the necessary investment for economic development activities.
Federal Bureaucracy under Domestic-Dependent Nation Status
Domestic-dependent status, as applied to Native American governments in the U.S., requires federal approval on decisions relating to its trust status. Changes to federally recognized tribal constitutions and purchases of land for tribal trusts require approval from the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs. Native American nations have been fighting this requirement, with some success, in recent years. The Akaka Bill calls for the creation of a federal office for Native Hawaiian relations to be established in the Department of the Interior with broad, unspecified powers over the Native Hawaiian government.
Will a new Native Hawaiian government that is federally recognized be subject to federal approvals on internal matters? Waiting for approvals from federal bureaucrats (officials who are appointed by the president and are not elected or appointed by the Native Hawaiian government or electorate) located in Washington, D.C., would entail a serious loss of economic autonomy, efficiency and expediency.
The constraints of a federally recognized domestic-dependent nation make decentralized economic development very difficult, if not impossible. Individuals, community groups and Native Hawaiian corporations would have little access to nongovernmental financing or the ability to pursue independent business development under a Native Hawaiian domestic-dependent nation. The prohibition on private property ownership under native jurisdiction will make it exceedingly difficult for individuals or private groups to get their own independent financing.
The Native Hawaiian government itself may seek other sources of business financing by developing joint partnerships with corporations where the Native Hawaiian government explicitly waives its right to sovereign immunity. This would open the Native Hawaiian government to litigation in the U.S. judicial system, but it provides corporate business partners an incentive to invest on trust lands. Additionally, revenues from the Native Hawaiian government itself could be used to invest in economic development.
Ultimately, domestic-dependent status would not mean an independent economy nor a return to pre-contact traditional Native Hawaiian economic systems and communal land tenure. Under the scenario described above, the government would direct the productive activities, however, in pre-contact Hawai‘i, there was significant decentralization of productive activities by region. Additionally, for most of Hawai‘i’s history, land was controlled at the local, district or island level; federal recognition will put lands under the ultimate control of the federal government.
An example of the difficulties arising from the involvement of politicians in economic development efforts can be found at OHA. Political and financial support for projects such as Hana Village Marketplace (a community-based shopping center) and Ho‘oulu Mea Kanu (native plant nurseries project) has ebbed and flowed according to political power struggles.
Decision-making by the trustees was conducted according to political alliances, not economic reality or efficiency. Projects that initially had the full support of OHA were cast aside with each election as the balance of power shifted from one coalition to another.
Similarly, political rather than purely economic concerns would also heavily influence a Native Hawaiian government that directs economic development.

America has a duty to set Hawaii Islands free

By PETER SUR
Hawaii Tribune-Herald - December 30, 2004
sent by Francis Boyle
Attorney: U.S. must leave

A professor of international law contends that the so-called Akaka Bill
would strip Hawaiians of their right to self-determination. He also says independence would be best achieved through international law.

Speaking Wednesday afternoon at the University of Hawaii at Hilo, Francis A. Boyle, who teaches at the University of Illinois, offered an ominous vision of the legislation that, as the bill states, would "provide a process for the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian governing entity."

Accompanied by sovereignty activist Dennis "Bumpy" Kanahele, Boyle was traveling on a two-day, five-speech tour around the state. Tuesday, he spoke on Oahu and Kauai. Wednesday, he spoke in Kailua-Kona, the UHH Theater and on Maui.

People should not be fooled by the phrase "governing entity," he said, adding that Arab states that do not recognize Israel refer to it as the "Zionist entity."

"Under the Akaka legislation, kanaka maoli (Native Hawaiians) are going to get an entity, not a government, not a state, just an entity, whatever that is," Boyle said. Sovereignty, he said, would not be determined by the Hawaiians as declared in the "Apology Bill" -- Congress' 1993 resolution apologizing for the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Instead, Boyle said the Akaka Bill would establish an "interim governing council" -- a far cry from an actual government. It would have no authority to enact laws or control land, and would be subject to federal jurisdiction.

"The United States federal government is setting up a process whereby it'stelling you, the kanaka maoli, how you are going to give up your sovereignty, give up your land and give up your self-determination."

He offered instead an alternative to the Akaka Bill: arguing the case in an
international court of law. Boyle said the United States made numerous treaties with the Hawaiian Kingdom in the 19th century, none of which has since been rescinded. Further, the Akaka bill and the Apology bill both recognize the Hawaiians have "never relinquished their claims" to sovereignty.

"They're trying to defeat and deny the right you had under international law, the right to self-determination, the right to reinstitution of these treaties, the right to the restoration of the Hawaiian Kingdom by saying, 'This is it. This will be your exercise of sovereignty, your exercise of self-determination and nothing more. You do what we tell you to do.'"

"A state is built from the ground up, not the top down. Kanaka maoli have to provide health care, education, social welfare, language skills in your own language. Everything else for your own people and build your state from the bottom up."

Boyle compared this approach to that of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, which he advised in the early 1990s. In lieu of government aid from Israel, the Palestinians have instead set up their own system of
self-determination.

"The United States promised 'perpetual peace and amity' to the Hawaiian Kingdom," Boyle said, referring to an 1849 treaty. "That promise is still there. Even though the United States has not honored it, it is obligated to honor it." The Hawaiian Kingdom exists in international law and treaties, if not in practice, he said.

Boyle said international law requires four criteria for a functioning, sovereign state: a permanent population, a recognized territory, a functioning government and the capability to conduct international relations. "As I see it what we need today is a functioning government, a provisional government of national unity for the Hawaiian Kingdom that is the alternative to Akaka," he said.


Peter Sur can be reached at psur@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
All rights reserved. Copyright (c) 2004 Hawaii Tribune Herald.
 NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org   

  
 The Maui News - January 01, 2005
sent by Francis Boyle
http://mauinews.com/story.aspx?id=4553
By HARRY EAGAR, Staff Writer

KAHULUI - The Akaka Bill is a trick to swindle Native Hawaiians out
of any recourse to international support, University of Illinois
professor Francis Boyle told a crowd of about 50 Mauians Wednesday
night. His talk at the Kahului Community Center was sponsored by the Nation of Hawaii with financial support from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

During the question period afterward, it became clear that adherents
of at least three sovereignty groups were represented in the audience
- Nation of Hawai'i, Reinstated Hawaiian Government and Akahi Nui's
Kingdom of Hawai'i.

"The kanaka maoli must build and restore the Kingdom of Hawaii from
the ground up," Boyle said."They're trying to reduce and eliminate all your claims under international law."

However, he also said that until the many sovereignty groups can unite "to establish a viable, effective government," no credible plaintiff will have standing to petition the International Court of Justice.
"The problem is, what we need now is a government of national unity."

Boyle has worked with Keanu Sai, the chairman of the Council of Regency and acting minister of the interior of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government, to attempt to get the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the joint resolution annexing Hawaii in 1898. The court decided they lacked standing, because the United States does not recognize the Kingdom of Hawaii.

Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois. He is the legal representative of the Republic of Chechnya and founder and head of a group trying to impeach President Bush for an attempt to "impose a police state and a military dictatorship" on the United States.

Although he was born, raised, educated and is employed in the United
States, Boyle has taken citizenship in Ireland.

He has been advising sovereignty activists in the West Bank and Gaza Strip for 20 years and in Hawaii since 1993, when he lectured for the Hawaiian Sovereignty Advisory Commission, advising that the Revolution of 1893 and the annexation of the Republic of Hawaii in 1898 were contrary to international law and existing treaties and never had any validity.

He described the leaders of the overthrow of the kingdom as "a gang of cutthroats, killers, murderers and thieves." Therefore, he advised, "The Kingdom of Hawaii still exists as an international state." He said the Akaka Bill was written by members of the Federalist Society, which has four former members on the U.S. Supreme Court that voted not to accept the Hawaiian Kingdom Government's suit. He described the Federalist Society as " right-wing racists and bigots." "They're not going to give you a government," he said.

More information on Boyle is available online at www.impeach-bush-now.org
  NY Transfer News Collective       http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
                               
      A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012

HAITI

Payoffs to Haiti's renegade soldiers won't buy peace By DeWayne Wickham Erzilidanto@aol.com Op/Ed - USATODAY.com pictures:www.peterkuper.com/ war/war.htm and www.kreyol.com/ While the Bush administration wages war against terrorism in Iraq (news - web sites), the government it propped up in Haiti has caved in to the terrorists who've seized control of parts of that impoverished Caribbean island nation. Last week, Haiti's interim Prime Minister Gerard Latortue began handing out checks to members of his country's former army, a brutal military force that was disbanded in 1995. So far, more than 200 former soldiers have received checks. The money, which the renegade soldiers say is back pay that covers the past 10 years, is actually a thinly veiled blackmail payment. Latortue agreed to dole out the checks, which are expected to total $29 million, after months of failed attempts to get the renegade soldiers to turn in their weapons. In the year since they led the rebellion that toppled the government of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Haiti's former soldiers have created what amounts to a shadow government. They hold sway in parts of the country that are beyond the reach of the government and the small United Nations (news - web sites) peacekeeping force that keeps it in power. Last year's rebellion was the second time Haitian soldiers had a hand in removing Aristide from power. Back in 1991, a military coup forced him to flee the country just months after he became Haiti's first democratically elected president. During Aristide's absence, Haiti's army violently suppressed opponents of its power grab. Aristide Aristide cashiered the entire army after he was restored to power in 1995 - replacing it with a lightly armed national police force. The police were no match for the renegade soldier-led rebellion that swept across Haiti a year ago. Aristide was replaced by Latortue, a Florida resident who was named interim prime minister by a Haitian "council of elders" that the Bush administration was instrumental in cobbling together. Shortly after taking office, Latortue called the rebels "freedom fighters," even though some of their leaders are widely thought to have been part of the death squads that preyed upon Aristide's supporters. Compensation "It just reaffirms the corruption of the nature of puppet government," Bill Fletcher Jr., president of TransAfrica Forum, said of the payment policy. His is a Washington-based group that monitors events in African and Caribbean nations. "Any amount of money is legitimizing their activities when every credible report indicates that these guys are running around the countryside killing people, tracking down Aristide's supporters and driving people underground," Fletcher said. He makes a good point. According to Amnesty International, the rebel force is led by Guy Philippe, a former army officer who is thought to have been involved in a failed 2000 coup. Other leaders of the rebels include Louis-Jodel Chamblain and Jean Pierre Baptiste, both members of a paramilitary group that is accused of carrying out massacres and assassinations in support of the 1991 coup. So what makes these men "freedom fighters" and deserving of compensation for lost work? They got rid of Aristide, a former Catholic priest who was widely backed by the poor to whom he once ministered. But Aristide has been reviled by the country's elite, whose bidding the army has historically done. In paying off the rebels, Latortue hopes to buy his government some time, if not ultimately peace. He apparently believes that once their pockets are filled  with money from Haiti's cash-strapped government, the rebels will lay down their weapons and go home. That's not likely to happen. Having cajoled Latortue into dipping deep into the national treasury to satisfy their demands, there's little chance that these terrorists will be satisfied. They know that once they give up their weapons - and their control of pockets of Haiti - they will lose their leverage with Latortue's government. Only defiance, not money, will get them to do that. So far, the Bush administration - Latortue's patron - has not taken a public stand on the Haitian government's attempt to end the insurgency by throwing money at the band of thugs that ousted Aristide and now threatens to undermine his replacement. That's too bad. Left to his own bad decision-making, Latortue has decided to appease rather than confront Haiti's terrorists. DeWayne Wickham writes weekly for USA TODAY. Forwarded by the Haitian Lawyers' Leadership Network ******See, The Haitian Leadership Networks' 7 "Men Anpil Chay Pa Lou" campaigns to help restore Haiti's independence, the will of the mass electorate and the rule of law. See, and http://www.margueritelaurent.com/law/lawpress.html or, http://www.margueritelaurent.com/pressclips/newsessaysreflections.html Meanwhile American and French businessmen advertise internationally for their business promotions in Haiti Employment Offer Chief Operations Officer Garment Manufacturing Industry USA & HAITI :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Dear Friend, PromoCapital is recruiting on behalf of a corporate client, The Astralis Group, for the following top-level position: The Astralis Group is a garment manufacturing company located in the USA and in Haiti and is seeking an experienced and accomplished Chief Operations Officer. The successful candidate will have the following profile: - MBA or Master's Degree in Management - Excellent communication and systems skills - Significant experience in the textile industry and in supply chain management, including at least 5 years in management positions - Excellent leadership skills - Self-starter, self-motivated and strong marketing and sales skills - US Citizen/Permanent resident - Willing to travel extensively and regularly - Fluency in English and French (oral, written) a must. Oral Fluency in Creole and Spanish a strong plus.   This position is located in Southern Florida. The successful candidate will also be willing to spend 3 months in North Carolina during his/her first year. If you believe you fit the profile, please send your cover letter and CV to the following address by mail, e-mail or fax. If you do not, and know of someone who might, please be kind enough to forward this message to any family member of friend you believe may have an interest.etc PromoCapital 111 Rue Faubert Petionville, Haïti Telephone: (509) 256-5777, (509) 256-5777 Fax: (509) 256-5779, (626) 608-3594 promocapital@promocapital.us http://www.promocapital.us The Internet Communications Network of Haiti 22 Angle Rues Ogé et Magny P.O. Box 16042 Pétionville, Haiti Telephone: (509) 511-1314 Cellular: (509) 557-5290 Fax: (626) 608-3594 http://www.intermediahaiti.com info@intermedia-haiti.com