· Minister Todd McClay says the New Zealand-India Free Trade Agreement’s reference to UNDRIP is not legally binding, but ministerial assurances alone are not enough.
· Ask the Government to put that assurance into legislation.
· Request an amendment to the India FTA Legislation Amendment Bill confirming that the Agreement's affirmation of UNDRIP does not give UNDRIP the force of law in New Zealand and does not create any new legal rights or obligations.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to make a submission on the New Zealand–India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill, expressing concern about the Agreement's affirmation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and calling for appropriate legal safeguards. You can read the Democracy Action written submission HERE, and the oral submission HERE.
But there is still more that can be done.
Although Trade Minister Todd McClay has stated that the reference to UNDRIP in the Agreement is not legally binding, ministerial assurances are not enough. Governments change, ministers change, and courts are not bound by political statements.
If the Government truly intends that the reference to UNDRIP has no legal effect, it should have no objection to putting that assurance into legislation.
Please take a few minutes to write to:
- Prime Minister Christopher Luxon
- Trade Minister Todd McClay
- ACT Leader David Seymour
Ask that the New Zealand–India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill be amended to make it clear that the Agreement's affirmation of UNDRIP:
- does not give UNDRIP the force of law in New Zealand;
- does not make it a relevant consideration in legal or administrative decision-making; and
- does not create any new legal rights or obligations.
A personal email is far more effective than a form letter. Even a short message requesting that Parliament provide legal certainty can make a difference. (See an example letter below).
Thank you again for your support. Together, we can continue to ensure that significant constitutional change occurs only with the clear approval of Parliament and the New Zealand people.
For more information, see our July newsletter article:
India FTA reopens door to UNDRIP
Example letter
We recommend sending a separate copy of your letter to each of the following:
- The Rt Hon Christopher Luxon, Prime Minister
Email: [email protected]
- Hon Todd McClay, Minister for Trade and Investment
Email: [email protected]
- Hon David Seymour, Leader of the ACT Party
Email: [email protected]
For each letter, insert the appropriate recipient's name and use the matching salutation (e.g. Dear Prime Minister, Dear Minister McClay, or Dear Mr Seymour).
[Date]
[Recipient's name]
[Title]
Dear [Prime Minister / Minister McClay / Mr Seymour],
I am writing to ask you to amend the New Zealand–India Free Trade Agreement Legislation Amendment Bill to ensure that the Agreement's affirmation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has no legal effect in New Zealand.
I support New Zealand expanding trade with India. However, I am concerned that Article 13.2 of the Free Trade Agreement affirms UNDRIP without any provision in the implementing legislation clarifying that this affirmation does not alter New Zealand law.
Minister McClay has stated that the reference to UNDRIP is not legally binding and does not impose any legal obligations on New Zealand. While I appreciate that assurance, I do not believe ministerial statements alone provide sufficient certainty. Governments and ministers change, and courts are not bound by political assurances.
If it is the Government's intention that the Agreement's affirmation of UNDRIP has no legal effect in New Zealand, that intention should be reflected in legislation.
I therefore ask that the implementing legislation be amended to make it clear that the Agreement's affirmation of UNDRIP:
- does not give UNDRIP the force of law in New Zealand;
- does not make it a relevant consideration in legal or administrative decision-making; and
- does not create any new legal rights or obligations.
Such an amendment would not alter New Zealand's commitments under the Free Trade Agreement. Rather, it would provide certainty that Parliament does not intend the Agreement to be used to influence the interpretation or development of New Zealand law.
This is a sensible safeguard that would give effect to the assurances already provided by the Minister while preserving Parliament's role as the maker of New Zealand law.
Thank you for considering my request. I look forward to your response.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Town or City]