Rokoika Law P.C

Cook Islands law firm, Rokoika Law P.C. Secures Contract to Review Fiji’s iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission

admin — Mon, 02 Sep 2024 07:33:45 +0000

Rokoika Law P.C., a Cook Islands-based law firm, has been awarded the contract to review the Fiji Ministry of iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission and its century old laws. The review aims to identify and recommend reforms for the Itaukei Lands Act 1905, which no longer aligns with contemporary governance standards and the needs of the indigenous community. We are delighted and honoured to have been awarded the contract to recommend reforms for this century-old legislation. This project represents a significant responsibility, and we are fully committed to the thoroughness and integrity required in this review. The work involved is substantial, requiring in-depth analysis, extensive research, and engagement with various stakeholders and the indigenous population for their insight. We have set up our Facebook page titled Native Land & Fisheries Commission Review Team (https://rb.gy/27j1sx ) to be inclusive in this consultation and to gather information from the diaspora without the need to leave Fiji. We need to complete this review within the next three months, providing a well-rounded and informed analysis that will support the necessary updates to the Act. We look forward to the challenges and opportunities this review presents and are committed to delivering results that will contribute to this founding legislation’s continued relevance and effectiveness. “Our legal experts, researchers, and social scientists will work diligently to ensure that the review is thorough and that our recommendations will contribute to more effective governance.” Our team comprises Ms Rokoika, Mr. Tevita Domocokai, Ratu Tevita Bukarau, Ms Terai Boaza and Ms Iva Vakalalabure. The outcome is expected to be crucial in modernising Fiji’s approach to the TLFC whilst balancing tradition with contemporary governance needs.

Murder suspect Found NOT GUILTY

admin — Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:24:34 +0000

Murder suspect Moetai Takaitu Found NOT GUILTY

“The law of self-defence is very peculiar in that you will judge him as he saw it and only how he saw it.”

After a thorough week-long trial and ten hours of deliberation, the 12-member jury found Moetai Takaitu NOT GUILTY of both murder and manslaughter. This decision brings a sense of justice and closure for Moetai, who has faced immense stress and uncertainty.

From the outset, our defence was anchored in the principle of self-defence. The law clearly states that the Crown is responsible for proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moetai’s actions on that night were driven by a need to protect himself from an immediate and violent threat posed by his step-son, Bruno.

On May 13, 2023, a day that began with a fishing trip ended in tragedy. After hours of socialising, an altercation over tomatoes escalated when Bruno turned off the lights and attacked Moetai in the dark. Struck and disoriented, Moetai defended himself by grabbing a knife and swinging it in the pitch black to fend off his step-son. Moetai had 2 defensive wounds, while Bruno had over 8 defensive wounds.

Crucial in the analysis of the evidence were the following:

I. Pathologist’s Report: The report indicated that Bruno’s death was rapid, caused by a fatal chest wound. The superficial injuries on Bruno were consistent with defensive actions by Moetai in the darkness.

II. Police Response: Constables’ testimonies revealed crucial inconsistencies and unreliability in the accounts given by Crown witnesses. The scene had been tampered with, and there was significant evidence that witnesses may have colluded.

III. Witness Credibility: The defence carefully examined the testimonies of Crown witnesses, revealing contradictions and highlighting how trauma, alcohol, and potential biases affected their recollection of events.

Our hearts go out to Bruno’s family, grieving a profound loss.

The Law of Self-Defence

The jury was reminded that self-defence must be judged from the defendant’s perspective. In the darkness, under attack, and impaired by alcohol, Moetai’s actions were driven by an instinct to survive. Given the circumstances as he perceived them, the force he used was reasonable. The superficial wounds did not deter Bruno, and only the fatal wound ended the threat.

A Just Verdict

The jury’s NOT GUILTY verdict reflects a fair and comprehensive consideration of the evidence. It acknowledges the reality of the threat Moetai faced and the reasonableness of his response. This case highlights the importance of understanding the context and immediacy of self-defence situations. Ms Rokoika, in her opening and closing argument, emphasised the following, “The law of self-defence is very peculiar in that you will judge him as he saw it and only how he saw it.”

We sincerely thank everyone who supported Moetai during this challenging period.

As we move forward, we trust this case will serve as a poignant reminder of the critical importance of safeguarding individual rights and ensuring that justice is administered impartially. Moetai can now begin rebuilding his life, free from the burden of these charges.

On behalf of Moetai’s defense team at Rokoika Law P.C., we would like to thank you once again for your support. Justice has been rightfully served, and Moetai is now free.

POSTSCRIPT

Jury Trials

The Magna Carta (1215) states that no freeman should be imprisoned or stripped of his rights without a lawful judgment by his peers, laying the groundwork for the jury system. This has evolved over the centuries, and English common law has further developed the jury trial system. The right to a jury trial has become a cornerstone of the legal system and the basis of criminal trials in the Cook Islands. This ensures that the accused is judged by a group of peers from the community rather than by a single judge. Juries reflect societal values and norms. By involving ordinary citizens in the justice process, jury trials enhance public confidence in the legal system and ensure that legal decisions align with community standards. Jury deliberations and verdicts help hold the legal system accountable to the community. The jury system acts as a check on the legal and judicial authorities, providing a means for citizens to participate directly in the administration of justice

#JusticeServed #NotGuilty #SelfDefence #LegalVictory #MetuamoetaiTakaitu #RokoikaLawPC

The People’s Chief: Tamatoa Ariki

Rokoika Law P.C. — Wed, 07 Aug 2024 10:04:44 +0000

On August 6, 2024, Justice W.W. Isaac delivered a judgment in the High Court of the Cook Islands regarding the right to hold the Chiefly Title of Tamatoa Ariki. The case was initiated under Section 409(f) of the Cook Islands Act 1915 to determine the rightful holder of the Tamatoa Ariki title. The parties involved were Tarota Tom and Teao Tangaroa, both claiming to be the rightful holders of the chiefly title.

Legal Framework
Section 490(f) of the Cook Islands Act 1915 grants the High Court jurisdiction to determine the right to hold an Ariki title. Section 422 of the Act emphasizes that decisions must be based on ancient customs and usage of the Cook Islands Maoris. Isaac J emphasized, “The Court’s role is not to elect an Ariki but to ensure that the appropriate custom has been followed.”

The decision hinged on whether each party followed the traditional processes for electing a Tamatoa Ariki. A 1981 case precedent provided a framework for evaluating the claims before the Court.

Genealogical Eligibility
Both parties were confirmed to be descendants of the Peirangi and Marokii lines, qualifying them for the title based on genealogical criteria. “As both candidates are descendants of the Peirangi and Marokii lines, they are eligible to hold the Tamatoa Ariki title,” stated the judgment.

Kopu Ariki Meetings
Three significant meetings were scrutinized:

October 25, 2016: The Kopu Ariki unanimously elected Tarota. However, Teao contested this meeting, arguing it lacked representation from the Marokii line.
November 2, 2020: Teao was elected through a secret ballot, a method Tarota contested as non-traditional.
November 22, 2022: This meeting confirmed Teao’s election, with no minutes provided to the Court but substantial support from the Are Taunga.

Residency Requirement
Both parties met the residency requirement, having been residents of Arutanga during their respectivenominations and elections.

Presentation of the Kura
Tarota’s Kura was presented in 2021 by a self-appointed Putokotoko and questioned for its delayed presentation and lack of customary adherence. Teao’s Kura, on the other hand, was presented immediately after the 2020 meeting by the duly appointed Putokotoko, following traditional protocols.

Investiture Ceremony
Regarding Tarota’s Ceremony, His Honour confirmed that although detailed and attended by many, it faced criticism for its non-traditional elements and the officiation by a self-appointed Putokotoko. Teao’s ceremony, on the other hand, was conducted according to customs with the traditional makers’ regalia and was supported by the Are Taunga.

Conclusion
Justice Isaac found in favour of Teao Tangaroa as the rightful holder of the Tamatoa Ariki title, emphasizing the following:

The meeting process favoured Teao, as it included both Peirangi and Marokii lines, and was endorsed by the Mataiapo
Teao’s presentation of the kura was in accordance with custom
Teao received explicit support from the High Priest and the Are Taunga, while Tarota lacked this crucial endorsement.
The investiture ceremony is essential to the custom of Tamatoa Ariki, and Teao adhered to all correct customs,

This judgement plays a critical role in customary law and maintaining the integrity of the Cook Islands Maori cultural heritage.

Rokoika Law P.C. is delighted to have represented Teao Tangaroa in this case and reaffirms our commitment to upholding justice and preserving our rich Maori cultural traditions.

“This judgment reaffirms the sanctity of our customs and the rightful process in electing our Arikis,” remarked Ms Lavi Rokoika, counsel for Teao Tangaroa.

https://rokoikalaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/453812668_862674238526607_1549579283852677450_n.jpg

Friends of Fiji Wins Historic Judgment Against Cook Islands’ Immigration Policy

Rokoika Law P.C. — Fri, 08 Mar 2024 23:04:07 +0000

In a pivotal judgment by Chief Justice Keane, the High Court of the Cook Islands delivered a comprehensive decision on the application by Friends of Fiji Inc. challenging specific provisions of the Cook Islands Immigration Regulations 2022. Friends of Fiji was represented by Rokoika Law P.C. while the Attorney General was represented by the Crown Law Office of the Cook Islands. This case revolved around the contention that the residency thresholds for permanent residence, set by the 2022 Regulations, discriminated between New Zealand citizens and other nationals, and were not authorized by the Cook Islands Immigration Act 2021, hence alleging them to be ultra vires and discriminatory under the Cook Islands Constitution.

The Chief Justice meticulously analyzed the relationship between the Cook Islands and New Zealand, focusing on citizenship and residency regulations over the years, leading up to the Immigration Act 2021 and the subsequent Immigration Regulations of 2022 and 2023. The judgment addressed the historic and evolving constitutional relationship between the Cook Islands and New Zealand, highlighting the unique status of Cook Islanders as New Zealand citizens and the preferential treatment accorded to them in terms of residency in the Cook Islands.

The core issues at hand were the legality of the residency thresholds set by the 2022 Regulations and whether they were consistent with the overarching Immigration Act 2021, and, importantly, if they violated the principles of equality and non-discrimination as enshrined in the Cook Islands Constitution.

Chief Justice Keane determined that the preferential treatment of New Zealand citizens regarding residency requirements was not explicitly endorsed by the Immigration Act 2021, nor was it consistent with the Act’s empowering provisions. Furthermore, the judgment held that the executive’s attempt to give effect to these preferences through secondary legislation exceeded the scope of the Act and was thus ultra vires. This conclusion was underscored by a detailed examination of the legislative delegation of power, the principle of separation of powers, and the requirement for primary legislation to give effect to treaty obligations or significant policy shifts.

Additionally, the Chief Justice refrained from making a definitive ruling on whether the residency preferences were unlawfully discriminatory, as the underlying regulation was already found to be invalid. This aspect of the judgment underlines the court’s systematic approach, emphasizing the foundational legal question of legislative authority and scope before addressing constitutional rights and freedoms.

In conclusion, the court’s decision to invalidate the contested residency preferences for New Zealand citizens underscores the importance of adhering to legislative authority, the principles of non-discrimination, and the proper process for enacting changes that affect fundamental rights. This judgment not only reaffirms the constitutional safeguards against discrimination (which the court says did not occur in this instance) but also highlights the procedural obligations of the executive and legislative branches in enacting and implementing immigration policy. The Friends of Fiji Inc. case thus stands as a landmark decision, delineating the boundaries of legislative and executive powers in the Cook Islands and reaffirming legislative delegation of power and the principle of separation of powers. The Chief Justice said,

“I do consider the obligation to accord the New Zealand residence and entry preference, assumed in the 2001 joint declaration, should have been endorsed explicitly by Parliament in the Immigration Act 2021… I grant this application to the extent of the following declaration: the NZ permanent residence preference, expressed in reg 8(2)(d), Immigration Regulations, is invalid because:

(i) it purports to give effect to a 2001 Joint CI-NZ Centenary Declaration obligation only able to be given domestic legislative effect by Parliament;
(ii) it is beyond the scope of the Immigration Act 2021.”

Understanding Cook Islands Property Law: A Complete Guide for Expats

webby — Tue, 06 Jun 2023 13:18:31 +0000

Understanding Cook Islands Property Law: A Complete Guide for Expats

June 6, 2023

Recent

The "No Vacancy" Sign on Paradise

Alright, let’s get something straight right off the bat. Picture yourself lounging on a white sandy beach, sipping a fruity cocktail, enjoying the cool ocean breeze, and then thinking, “Gee, I should buy a piece of this paradise!” Well, in the Cook Islands, there’s a minor hiccup. Only Cook Islands’ nationals can own freehold land. Just imagine showing up at a hotel and finding a “no vacancy” sign. Bit of a bummer, right? But hang on! There’s a workaround.

The Leasehold: Your Golden Ticket

Ever thought about going on a long lease? We’re talking 60 years long. That’s roughly the amount of time you need to become a pro at the ukulele! Here’s the fun part – unlike some places that have knotty, eyebrow-raising lease agreements, the Cook Islands make it a breeze. As an expat, you can lease land from local landowners (with BTIB approval – but that’s a blog for another day). Just remember, it’s always smart to have a local lawyer guide you through the process because, let’s face it, legal jargon is less fun than learning to snorkel.

Transferring Land: Hot Potato with a Legal Twist

So, you’ve got yourself a long-term lease, and you’re all set. Now, you’re thinking about selling it someday. Hold your seahorses, because transferring leasehold land in the Cook Islands isn’t as simple as a game of hot potato. The lease can be sold, but the new tenant needs consent from the landowners who have the right of first refusal (again a blog for another day). Sounds like a good time to make some friends, doesn’t it?

Squatter's Rights: An Unexpected Twist

Remember when we said Cook Islands’ property law was fun? Here’s another twist for you. In the Cook Islands, if someone lives on a piece of land long enough without the owner’s objection, they might just get rights to it. This concept, known as “squatter’s rights,” is recognized in the Cook Islands, albeit in a more nuanced manner. It’s like a long-term surprise party – for the squatter, at least!

So there you have it! That’s your crash course in Cook Islands’ property law. Not quite the legal thrill ride you were expecting? Well, remember: in the end, all those legal shenanigans are the small price to pay for enjoying a slice of paradise. Here’s to your future of sun, sand, and, yes, the occasional law book. Cheers!