Nhsc-v1-18

From GrassrootWiki
Revision as of 08:48, 7 February 2006 by WikiSysop (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Previous Page Next Page

nhsc-v1-18

Text Only

Further, if aboriginal title existed, the question of whether the United States could be responsible to compensate for its loss is determined by when that title was extinguished. The assumption of sovereignty over the area by the United States must have acted to cause the extinguishment of aboriginal title in order for compensation to be considered. The chapter reviews the history of Hawaiian land law, and finds that acts of the Hawaii legislature before 1893 had the effect of extinguishing aboriginal title, if it had indeed existed. Because the United states did not extinguish any such title, it is not responsible to compensate for its loss. Further, any such loss cannot be compensated under either the Fifth Amendment or under the Indian Claims Commission Act, as presently written.

The question of whether native Hawaiians are entitled to compensation for loss of any "recognized" title to Crown and Government lands is also examined in this chapter. It reviews the definition of the possible laws by which the United States may be regarded as having "recognized" that native Hawaiians have title to Crown and Government lands. The analysis determines that the United States did not recognize title of native Hawaiians to these lands. Further, even if there were recognized title, no compensation for loss of that title would be available under present law.

The next section of the chapter considers whether native Hawaiians are entitled to compensation for loss of sovereignty. The section defines sovereignty, primarily as that concept has been developed in the context of Indian tribes. Since the United States Congress can take away sovereignty of native groups at will, loss of sovereignty is not compensable under the Fifth Amendment. Moreover, it cannot be compensated under the Indian Claims Commission Act. Therefore, native Hawaiians have no present legal entitlement to compensation from the United States for any loss of sovereignty.

The next section of this chapter considers whether there is any trust relationship arising from statutes or other laws, between the natives of Hawaii and the United States. It examines each possible source of such a trust relationship and determines that if there is any such relationship, it is at most a very limited special trust that would not entitle native Hawaiians to any compensation. Finally, the chapter compares any possible native Hawaiian claims to claims of native Alaskans, for which the latter were compensated in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.

"Review of Hawaiian Homes Commission Programs"

The review of the Hawaiian Home Lands program was conducted by the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of the Interior, in response to a request in February 1982. The Inspector General submitted a report in September 1982, and it is that report, along with the reply by the Governor of the State of Hawaii, that appears as this chapter of Part II. The report discusses problems concerning the status of the Hawaiian Home Lands, program accomplishment, financial management, applicant eligibility lists, and leasing activities.

"Federal Responses to the Unique Needs of Native Hawaiians"

The steps that the Federal Government is taking to meet the unique needs of native Hawaiians are outlined in this chapter. These include identification of federal programs for

-p18-

Previous Page Next Page