A contested case between Native Hawaiian activists and the Board of Land and Natural Resources has been appealed to the state Supreme Court.
In July, the BLNR voted to approve an updated draft of the Comprehensive Management Plan, the University of Hawaii’s land management framework for Maunakea.
During that hearing, activist Laulani Teale told the board that she would be filing a contested case against the board, citing potential public health impacts to the Native Hawaiian community caused by the new CMP.
Board chair Suzanne Case told Teale at the time that the board was unable to take any action on her contested case at the time, asking her to file the case in writing within 10 days. All but one board member then voted in support of the new CMP.
Since then, Teale has filed her petition for a contested case, which was appealed to the state Supreme Court in late August.
“Since the board didn’t vote on the contested case, but still approved the CMP, then they implicitly denied the contested case,” said Honolulu attorney Bianca Isaki, who is representing Teale. Teale’s petition argues that, as a Native Hawaiian and a cultural practitioner, she is directly impacted by the board’s decision to approve the CMP.
“My children have endured great stress related to (the) blockage of our cultural practice and that of those close to our family,” wrote Teale in her petition. “Other practitioners we know, and their families, have endured great stress due to restriction of their access and other aspects of colonization related to Maunakea. Some have not survived. This affects us severely.”
Teale included a list of several issues she has with the new CMP and the BLNR’s handling of the matter. In particular, she argues that the general public did not have sufficient time to review the 600-page CMP before it was approved, that the CMP makes no distinction between the general public and cultural practitioners, and that the rights of Native Hawaiians to access Maunakea are not protected by the document.
“The effect of this is that in most ways, a lifelong master practitioner of ancient Maunakea practices is, for all practical purposes, treated the same as and given the same rights as a tourist, and has far fewer access rights than a newly-arrived astronomy staff person with no prior association to Hawaii at all,” Teale wrote. “Taken as a whole, this CMP and the processes surrounding it meet the criteria … for a component of incremental genocide.”
The CMP also does not explain how it interacts with a law passed this year that will create a new state agency to manage the mountain, Teale wrote. Because of her issues with the CMP, Teale’s petition calls for the CMP to be canceled permanently and the BLNR should overhaul its decision-making process “to facilitate genuine civil community involvement.”
Isaki said the Supreme Court has not yet scheduled any action on the petition. Should the court rule in favor of the petition, she said the BLNR’s decision regarding the CMP would be invalidated.
“She’s a cultural practitioner, and she has a right to access the mauna,” Isaki said. “I think she has a good case.”
Email Michael Brestovansky at mbrestovansky@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
