{"id":5079,"date":"2021-03-15T17:59:42","date_gmt":"2021-03-15T17:59:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hawaiiankingdom.org\/blog\/?p=5079"},"modified":"2021-03-15T17:59:43","modified_gmt":"2021-03-15T17:59:43","slug":"iadl-resolution-on-the-us-occupation-of-the-hawaiian-kingdom","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hawaiiankingdom.org\/blog\/iadl-resolution-on-the-us-occupation-of-the-hawaiian-kingdom\/","title":{"rendered":"IADL Resolution on the US Occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The following resolution was adopted by the IADL Council, in virtual session, on 7 February 2021:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

IADL RESOLUTION CALLING UPON THE UNITED STATES TO IMMEDIATELY COMPLY WITH INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ITS PROLONGED OCCUPATION OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS\u2014THE HAWAIIAN KINGDOM<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) is a non-governmental organization of human rights lawyers founded in 1946, with member associations throughout the world and with consultative status in ECOSOC. IADL is dedicated to upholding international law and promoting the tenets of the UN Charter in furtherance of peace and justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The IADL strongly condemns the January 1893 invasion of the Hawaiian Kingdom by the United States and its subsequent unlawful and prolonged occupation to date<\/strong>, a clear violation of customary international law at the time, which is currently set out in Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations prohibiting the use of force. The IADL has always been a proponent of the rule of law and a State\u2019s obligation to comply with international humanitarian law, which includes the law of occupation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2001, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom<\/em>, stated \u201cin the nineteenth century the Hawaiian Kingdom existed as an independent State recognized as such by the United States of America, the United Kingdom and various other States, including by exchanges of diplomatic or consular representatives and the conclusion of treaties.\u201d [1] The Hawaiian Kingdom currently has treaties with Austria, Belgium, Bremen, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hamburg, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United States. [2] The Hawaiian Kingdom also became a member of the Universal Postal Union on January 1, 1882.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After completing an investigation into the United States role in the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government on January 17, 1893, President Cleveland apprised the Congress of his findings and conclusions. In his message to the Congress, he stated, \u201cAnd so it happened that on the 16th day of January, 1893, between four and five o\u2019clock in the afternoon, a detachment of marines from the United States steamer Boston, with two pieces of artillery, landed at Honolulu. The men, upwards of 160 in all, were supplied with haversacks and canteens, and were accompanied by a hospital corps with stretchers and medical supplies. This military demonstration upon the soil of Honolulu was of itself an act of war.\u201d [3] The President concluded, that \u201cthe military occupation of Honolulu by the United States on the day mentioned was wholly without justification, either as an occupation by consent or as an occupation necessitated by dangers threatening American life and property.\u201d [4]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This invasion coerced Queen Lili\u2018uokalani, executive monarch of the Hawaiian Kingdom, to conditionally surrender to the superior power of the United States military, where she stated, \u201cNow, to avoid any collision of armed forces and perhaps the loss of life, I do, under this protest, and impelled by said force, yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon the facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the constitutional sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.\u201d The President acknowledged that by \u201can act of war\u2026the Government of a\u2026friendly and confiding people has been overthrown.\u201d [5]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Through executive mediation between the Queen and the new U.S. Minister to the Hawaiian Islands, Albert Willis, that lasted from November 13, 1893 through December 18, 1893, an agreement of peace was reached. [6] According to the executive agreement, by exchange of notes, the President committed to restoring the Queen as the constitutional sovereign, and the Queen agreed, after being restored, to grant a full pardon to the insurgents. Political wrangling in the Congress, however, blocked President Cleveland from carrying out his obligation of restoration of the Queen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Five years later, at the height of the Spanish-American War, President Cleveland\u2019s successor, William McKinley, signed a congressional joint resolution of annexation on July 7, 1898, unilaterally seizing the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes. In the Lotus<\/em> case, the Permanent Court of International Justice stated that \u201cthe first and foremost restriction imposed by international law upon a State is that\u2026it may not exercise its power in any form in the territory of another State.\u201d [7]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This rule of international law was acknowledged by the Supreme Court in United<\/em> States v. Curtiss-Wright, Corp.<\/em> (1936), when the court stated, \u201cNeither the Constitution nor the laws passed in pursuance of it have any force in foreign territory unless in respect of our own citizens, and operations of the nation in such territory must be governed by treaties, international understandings and compacts, and the principles of international law.\u201d [8] In 1988, the U.S. Department of Justice\u2019s Office of Legal Counsel concluded, it is \u201cunclear which constitutional power Congress exercised when it acquired Hawaii by joint resolution.\u201d [9]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under international law, \u201ca disguised annexation aimed at destroying the independence of the occupied State, represents a clear violation of the rule preserving the continuity of the occupied State.\u201d [10]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the limitations of United States legislation, the Congress went ahead and enacted the Territorial Act (1900) changing the name of the governmental infrastructure to the Territory of Hawai\u2018i. [11] Fifty-nine years later, the Congress changed the name of the Territory of Hawai\u2018i to the State of Hawai\u2018i in 1959 under the Statehood Act. [12] The governmental infrastructure of the Hawaiian Kingdom continued as the governmental infrastructure of the State of Hawai\u2018i.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On February 25, 2018, United Nations Independent Expert, Dr. Alfred M. deZayas, in his communication with members of the State of Hawai\u2018i Judiciary wrote, \u201cI have come to understand that the lawful political status of the Hawaiian Islands is that of a sovereign nation-state in continuity; but a nation-state that is under a strange form of occupation by the United States resulting from an illegal military occupation and a fraudulent annexation. As such, international laws (the Hague and Geneva Conventions) require that governance and legal matters within the occupied territory of the Hawaiian Islands must be administered by the application of the laws of the occupied state (in this case, the Hawaiian Kingdom), not the laws of the occupier (the United States).\u201d [13]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The IADL fully supports the National Lawyers Guild\u2019s 2019 resolution that \u201ccalls upon the United States of America immediately to begin to comply with international humanitarian law in its prolonged and illegal occupation of the Hawaiian Islands.\u201d [14] Together with the National Lawyers Guild (NLG):<\/p>\n\n\n\n