Naʻi Aupuni releases strange, defensive statement regarding protesters

The controversial organization authorized by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) to “help establish a path for Hawaiian self-determination,” Naʻi Aupuni, is garnering protest from some of its own intended beneficiaries. Some Native Hawaiian community members dispute Naʻi Aupuni’s authority and consider the process it is undertaking—an ʻaha, or constitutional convention—to be illegitimate.

Longtime activist and sovereignty movement organizer Walter Ritte—who had previously announced his candidacy as a delegate to the ʻAha—held a press conference earlier this morning announcing his decision to abstain from the convention process and withdraw as a candidate.

In response to Ritte’s conference and criticism from others, Naʻi Aupuni released an unattributed statement to the media accusing the protestors of refusing to participate because they are afraid that they won’t get their way. The statement is odd enough to warrant reprinting:

RESPONSE FROM NAʻI AUPUNI REGARDING THOSE WHO PROTEST THEIR PROCESS

HONOLULU – Naʻi Aupuni encourages Native Hawaiians to voice their opinion on the election process because the voters and delegate candidates should hear all voices.

However, the fact that some Native Hawaiians protest because they are concerned that their desired outcome will not be accepted emphasizes the need for a Native Hawaiian convention. Without a process where elected leaders can discuss various options and issues to find a consensus, the Native Hawaiian community will never proceed forward in unity. The outcome of the Naʻi Aupuni process, which involves 90,000 potential voters and 200 candidates, cannot be predetermined but it will be an important first step toward achieving Native Hawaiian solidarity.

In fact, protesters such as Andre Perez—and now Ritte—have repeatedly said that their concern stems from a serious flaw in the foundation of the process itself: The pool of voters Naʻi Aupuni references in its response is taken directly from the Kanaʻiolowalu roll.

The Kanaʻiolowalu roll process was, itself, deeply flawed, argue the protesters. Not only did it fail to even come close to including a majority of possible Hawaiian registrants, but also—as a roll controlled by the State of Hawaiʻi—it is inherently another form of U.S. colonial control over Hawaiʻi. As such, the ʻAha is a process that is illegitimate and unreliable and, for a substantial number of Native Hawaiians, seems doomed to fail from the get-go.