Nu Tireni · Evidence Series · Part 33 · Formal Record Request
The first formal OIA request to the Waitangi National Trust Board
The investigation now leaves theory and enters compulsory record production. The Board is subject to the Official Information Act 1982. This request asks for the exact documents that can show whether the present family and territorial representative positions rest only on statutory Board appointment or whether any separate hapū, iwi, whānau or Kīngitanga mandate was actually relied upon.
Send-readyOIA s 12OIA s 22
Where the request goes
The Trust's official contact page publishes info@waitangi.org.nz as its general contact address. The request should be addressed to the Waitangi National Trust Board and clearly identified as an Official Information Act request so that the correct statutory process is engaged from receipt.
Delivery record mattersKeep the sent email, delivery timestamp and any acknowledgement. The statutory clock runs from receipt. If the Board receives the request on 3 September 2026, the ordinary 20-working-day decision deadline would fall on Thursday, 1 October 2026, unless a lawful extension is notified under section 15A.
The request is deliberately divided into four schedules
Schedule ACurrent appointment resolutions and confirmation resolutions.
Schedule BNomination, whakapapa, endorsement and mandate material relied upon.
Schedule CSection 22 policies, principles, rules and guidelines defining qualification.
Schedule DThe 2015 restructuring records that split the original combined family position into four separate offices.
This structure matters because a lawful privacy redaction affecting one nomination document should not become a reason to withhold unrelated Board resolutions, policies or historical restructuring papers.
Send-ready request
To: Waitangi National Trust Board
Email: info@waitangi.org.nz
Subject: Official Information Act request — representative-member appointments, qualification criteria and mandate records
Tēnā koutou,
I am making this request under the Official Information Act 1982.
The request concerns the representative-member positions established under the Waitangi National Trust Board Act 1932 and Schedule 1, including the current positions associated with the families of Hōne Heke, Maihi Kawiti, Tāmati Wāka Nene and Pōmare, and the representative position for Māori living in the North Island south of Auckland.
SCHEDULE A — CURRENT APPOINTMENT RECORDS
For each of the current officeholders in those five representative positions, please provide:
1. the resolution by which the Board appointed the current officeholder;
2. the subsequent resolution confirming the appointment;
3. the agenda, minutes, Board paper, memorandum, report or recommendation relating to the appointment;
4. the date on which the vacancy arose and the date on which the appointment took effect; and
5. the names or positions of the Board members who participated in the appointment decision, to the extent recorded in the relevant official information.
SCHEDULE B — NOMINATION, QUALIFICATION AND MANDATE MATERIAL
For each of those five appointments, please provide:
6. any nomination submitted for the officeholder;
7. any other nominations or expressions of interest considered by the Board;
8. any whakapapa, lineage, family-connection or eligibility material relied upon by the Board;
9. any letter, resolution, endorsement, nomination or other communication from any hapū, iwi, marae, whānau, Kīngitanga body, trust, incorporated entity or other representative organisation supporting or opposing the appointment;
10. any record of consultation undertaken with any such body before the appointment; and
11. any document recording the Board's reasons for concluding that the appointee was qualified for the particular representative position.
SCHEDULE C — SECTION 22 DECISION-MAKING RULES
Under section 22 of the Official Information Act 1982, please provide every current or historical document held by the Board containing any policy, principle, rule, guideline, protocol, practice note, manual, criteria or other decision-making standard used to determine:
12. whether a person is "qualified for the particular representative position";
13. how whakapapa or family membership is established or verified;
14. whether consultation with the relevant family, hapū, iwi, marae, whānau or other constituency is required;
15. how competing nominations are assessed;
16. whether tikanga or customary processes form part of the appointment process; and
17. whether any mandate beyond Board appointment is required.
SCHEDULE D — 2015 RESTRUCTURING OF THE ORIGINAL FAMILY POSITION
Please provide all official information held by the Board relating to the implementation of the Waitangi National Trust Board Amendment Act 2015 insofar as it concerned the disestablishment of the representative position first held by Riri Maihi Kawiti and the establishment or implementation of the separate Hōne Heke, Maihi Kawiti, Tāmati Wāka Nene and Pōmare family positions, including:
18. Board papers, minutes, reports and correspondence concerning the restructuring;
19. consultation undertaken with the affected families, hapū, iwi, marae or whānau;
20. any submissions, resolutions, endorsements or objections received from those communities;
21. any advice about the historical, whakapapa or constitutional basis for the four replacement positions; and
22. any record explaining how the Board intended the new positions to relate to the original 1932 representative position.
FORM OF RELEASE
Please provide the information electronically by email where possible.
Where any information is withheld, please:
a. identify the specific statutory withholding ground relied upon;
b. identify the document or category of information to which that ground applies;
c. release the remainder of any document with only the protected material redacted, where section 17 permits; and
d. explain any public-interest balancing undertaken where section 9 is relied upon.
If any requested information is not held by the Board but is believed to be held by another agency subject to the Act, please consider transfer under section 14 and advise me of that transfer.
If any part of this request requires clarification, please contact me before treating that part as incapable of being answered.
Ngā mihi,
Kiri Campbell
Why the request does not ask the Board to prove sovereignty
The OIA can compel access to information that exists and is held. It does not require an organisation to create a constitutional theory, answer debate questions or produce a justification that was never recorded.
That is why this request does not ask, “Do you hold the sovereignty of He Wakaputanga?” It asks for the documents the Board actually used when appointing representatives and restructuring the offices.
The records will answer the mandate question better than an argumentative question ever could.
How every possible response becomes evidence
| Board response | What it means evidentially | Next action |
|---|
| Documents released showing hapū or iwi endorsements | A contemporary representative mandate may exist. Its scope must then be read precisely. | Audit who authorised it, what powers were delegated, duration, revocability and constituency. |
| Only Board nomination and appointment material released | Strong evidence that the immediate mandate is internal statutory appointment rather than a separately documented hapū delegation. | Trace predecessor appointments backwards and search community archives independently. |
| No qualification policy exists | The Board may be exercising broad discretionary judgment under the deed rather than a published or formalised criteria framework. | Examine minutes and appointment reasoning for actual practice. |
| Section 22 policy released | We can identify the operative test for qualification and whether tikanga, whakapapa or community consultation is formally recognised. | Compare policy against each appointment file. |
| Information not held | Important negative evidence if the Board holds no nominations, endorsements or mandate documents for a position. | Record the absence exactly; do not turn it into proof that no external mandate ever existed. |
| Privacy redactions | Potentially lawful for personal information, but should not automatically justify withholding whole documents. | Assess section 9(2)(a), public interest and partial release. |
| Substantial collation claimed | May indicate request scope issues, particularly for older 2015 records. | Offer staged processing rather than abandoning the request. |
| Extension notified | Not itself a refusal. The notice should state the reason and extension period. | Record new deadline and assess whether the extension is reasonable. |
| Refusal | The refusal itself must be legally analysed. | Request reasons if necessary and consider Ombudsman review. |
The evidence ledger should begin the day the request is sent
| Ledger field | Entry to preserve |
|---|
| Request identifier | WNTB-OIA-01 |
| Date sent | Record actual transmission date |
| Recipient | info@waitangi.org.nz — Waitangi National Trust Board |
| Acknowledgement | Date, time, sender and any reference number |
| Ordinary statutory decision deadline | If received 3 September 2026: 1 October 2026, subject to lawful extension |
| Extension | Reason cited, date notified, new deadline |
| Transfer | Agency transferred to, statutory basis, date |
| Response classification | Full release / partial release / not held / refusal / transfer / extension |
| Withholding provisions | Record every section relied upon document by document |
| Mandate evidence found | Yes / no / ambiguous — with exact document reference |
What this request can establish — and what it cannot
It can establish the documentary basis of the Board's appointments.It may show family nominations, whakapapa verification, community endorsement, tikanga processes or an entirely internal Board selection process.
It cannot by itself prove that no hapū authority exists outside the Board's records.If the Board does not hold a mandate document, independent hapū, whānau, marae, Kīngitanga or archival records may still exist. An OIA “not held” response proves only that the Board does not hold the requested information at the time of the request.
The next layer after the response
When WNTB-OIA-01 is answered, each released record should be entered into the mandate ledger against the relevant historical line: Heke, Kawiti, Nene, Pōmare or Te Wherowhero/Kīngitanga. The appointment record can then be classified as statutory appointment only, family endorsement, organisational mandate, hapū mandate, or evidence of delegated jurisdiction.
Only the last category would begin to answer the constitutional succession question itself.
Primary and official sources
Official Information Act 1982 ↗
Ombudsman — section 22 internal decision-making rules guide ↗
Ombudsman — making official information requests ↗
Waitangi Treaty Grounds — official contact details ↗
Waitangi National Trust Board Act 1932 ↗