Is humanising a mountain the path to real transformation, or does it signal the need for a cultural paradigm shift in the operating system?
Recently, a family member shared their delight at the news of Taranaki Maunga becoming a legal person.
Of course, I was pleased for the eight Taranaki iwi. We should acknowledge progress in addressing historical Tiriti grievances, even if granting legal personality to an entity is a relatively small step – arguably the least the Crown can do. For those familiar with these issues, the question remains: will this recognition lead to meaningful change? Personally, I have only ever known or referred to the maunga as “Taranaki”.
At the same time, this news prompted deeper reflection. While legal personhood can serve as a tool for environmental protection, many Indigenous peoples find it problematic. It has its critics – including myself, as I have expressed in international indigenous human rights and environmental defender forums.
Indigenous perspectives on nature are deeply rooted in spiritual and kinship connections, guided by values such as respect, intergenerational responsibility, and mauri. Western legal constructs struggle to accommodate these values – more often than not, they fail entirely. These constructs are grounded in a colonial framework designed for control and exploitation, maintaining a dynamic where a powerful minority dictates terms over both nature and the vast majority of humanity. Legal personhood oversimplifies indigenous cosmological relationships. From a Māori perspective, natural entities such as maunga are tuakana – our evolved, senior kin.
It is, therefore, both ironic and audacious to impose upon them a legal framework originally designed for teina – junior kin, in this case, humans. Instead, we should aspire to elevate our own values and actions to align with the guardianship principles of our atua, ensuring that manaakitanga and kaitiakitanga are embedded in all that we do. If this became New Zealand’s norm, the colonisers’ so-called protective laws and regulations would be rendered unnecessary.
As it stands, legal personhood for Taranaki Maunga could serve as convenient greenwashing and indigenous-washing, allowing the state to appear ethical while continuing to perpetuate its colonial agenda. This move may be largely symbolic, a tokenistic gesture. A legal test case could potentially argue that degradation of the maunga’s mauri – through biodiversity loss or ecosystem destruction – is akin to “homicide” or a violation of human rights, such as the right to life or self-determination.
Yet, even humans struggle to defend their own rights within a so-called justice system that is structurally incapable of protecting what we value. Western legal systems emphasise rights while largely ignoring obligations – a separate but critical conversation. The real proof of their failure is the unfolding meta-crisis around us. If colonial legal frameworks were effective, we wouldn’t be witnessing the ecological collapse currently under way. It is likely that legal personhood, despite its symbolic significance, will face the same systemic barriers.
A more transformative approach for Aotearoa would be cultural change, whether led by the government or civil society. Several actions could drive this shift. First, an honest and compulsory school curriculum should include an accurate history of Māori-Crown relations, the true meaning of te Tiriti (not the distorted interpretations of reactionary politicians), and a deep integration of te reo me ōna tikanga. A strong civics education would also empower people to understand their rights and responsibilities as citizens. Secondly, constitutional transformation is essential. This could involve entrenching He Whakaputanga and te Tiriti, safeguarding environmental protections, affirming human rights, and ensuring that corporate interests do not override these principles.
One positive outcome from the disastrous Treaty principles bill – described by the Aotearoa Liberation League as a rehash of the Act Party’s 2005 bill (zombie ideas, it seems, are hard to kill) – is that it has sparked a national conversation. People are now debating the true interpretation of te Tiriti, the urgent need for constitutional transformation, and its vital role in environmental protection and restoration. If enough people in Aotearoa embrace this moment and push for change, we may finally turn the tide.
