A New Zealand law professor argues that the country’s constitutional framework is unjust and illegal, according to a new book titled Sovereignty: The Case for Constitutional Transformation. The publication, released in October 2026, examines the current system’s ability to protect Māori rights and calls for fundamental change.
No single written document
New Zealand stands apart from many nations by lacking a single written constitution. Instead, its legal framework follows the British model, relying on a mix of legislation, court rulings, historical documents, and unwritten conventions.
Professor Claire Charters, an expert in Indigenous law at the University of Auckland, challenges this structure. She questions why the nation has been reluctant to examine its arrangements and argues that the courts cannot overturn legislation passed by Parliament, even if it breaches human rights, Te Tiriti o Waitangi, or Indigenous peoples’ rights under international law.
“Our reluctance to question our constitution may reflect an attachment to the status quo, a desire to preserve existing privileges, or a lack of public awareness and debate,” Charters writes.
Charters highlights the case of climate activist Mike Smith, whose legal action against greenhouse gas emitters was permitted by the Supreme Court in 2024. The Government subsequently announced plans to legislate to block such claims, illustrating her concern that Parliament can intervene in court proceedings to restrict legal remedies.
Comparing systems
She points to amendments to the Oranga Tamariki Act, which removed a section requiring the Ministry for Children to give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and work in partnership with iwi and hapū. Parliament proceeded with the repeal despite a Waitangi Tribunal recommendation against the changes.
Charters challenges the perception that New Zealand compares favorably with other countries in protecting Indigenous peoples’ rights. Drawing on international research, she highlights Mexico as a model of constitutional reform that recognizes Indigenous self-determination.
She also cites research by the Harvard University Project on Indigenous Governance and Development, which found that Indigenous peoples achieve better economic, social, and environmental outcomes when exercising self-determination.
Charters argues that the constitutional weaknesses she identifies have implications for everyone, not just Māori. “New Zealand’s constitution doesn’t just fail Māori,” she writes, “it fails us all.”
