|
MARTIN: For both gentlemen, actually. But in general, what you're asking
<br />us, I see no problem with as long as the body can come with grips to what you're
<br />saying. Again, a point of clarification. All we would do is put it on a ballot, and the
<br />people would then vote on it. Now, I do have a question in regards to if it were to pass,
<br />what happens to police and fire protection? What is your concept on that?
<br />JIM: Well, our concept is very clear, that your State - I call it police
<br />powers, your body legislation, they have the rights under the Constitution, Article 12, in
<br />Section 1, to amend the Act. It is clear that identification, that the County, like I
<br />mentioned the last time, in Section 220, has authority within Hawaiian homes. Right
<br />now, it's to maintain the roads. It's in your Constitution, Article 12. They have the
<br />powers. That's all. Nothing more, because they're forbidden, under a Section they call
<br />206, it has to be within the Act before they can perform. It has to be part of a provision
<br />before anybody can perform. Your courts, in Article 17 of 217 in the Hawaiian Home
<br />Commission Act, his limit - the law clearly identifies that he has to have the powers
<br />from the Commissioners and his powers only - you can look at the provision - is only for
<br />contempt of court, nothing more. He don't make no decisions. He goes over the order.
<br />Your answer is just like I try to describe. You've got to get to the body legislation with
<br />the Department of Hawaiian Homes, as well as the Native Hawaiians in the community,
<br />to go through it and to amend the Act as such, that need for the benefit, or even the
<br />safety, welfare, of the police powers which we well know about, could be added. But
<br />right now, we find it is unlawful and they're committing fraud and conspiracy. We are
<br />taking people to court. Police Powers. Right now, I just talked to Wurdeman. We have
<br />gone to court. I'd like to tell you one of the most powerful case that we're going to use.
<br />We have the right to go back to the Ninth Circuit or the United States District Court in
<br />Hans vs. the Department of Justice, that is Aupuni '0 Hawaii, the group I represent
<br />called Uhane Hemolele. We were the plaintiffs and we went in there and they came out
<br />and says if they continue third party issues, then they're liable. We can come back in.
<br />And they have constantly done that. And the reason they don't address the
<br />Constitution and the law that they uphold, and to follow, there is a preempt law. In
<br />other words, there is a federal jurisdiction to hear the case in case of any violation, and
<br />I believe that this body can resolve a lot of pilikia between parties. That means
<br />problems within the people; misunderstandings. And they are slowly opening up, the
<br />County Council realizing the (indiscernible) jurisdiction. We will be going to the Police
<br />Commissioners. We've very disappointed with them. I'm taxpayers. We pay money for
<br />people that do things wrong.
<br />KAHAWAIOLA'A: And may I, Mr. Martin, just because I'm in this example mood,
<br />based on your question, is the fact what we're saying is they wanted, and this is the
<br />State of Hawaii along with the Native Hawaiians, wanted to amend the Hawaiian
<br />Homes Commission Act, as you all know - if you didn't now, you need to be 50% blood.
<br />When they wanted the successor to be 25% of blood, they went and had it amended,
<br />and Congress approved it, and that is now the law that says your successor does not
<br />have to be 50%. But the process was taken to amend it. So, by example, that is what's
<br />available. There is a process out there to doit, and your question, again, is if you need
<br />the fire protection, you already have the ability to go in and maintain the road, and trust
<br />
|