An urgent Waitangi Tribunal inquiry testing whether Māori born offshore have a right to citizenship has prompted firm positions from Ministers and the Prime Minister, even as officials laid out how an existing law already handles children of citizens by descent.
Internal Affairs Minister, Brooke van Velden, told Te Ao Māori News she would not reopen the Citizenship Act 1977 and would not be drawn on the Tribunal’s report or recommendations.
“No. I’m not opening up the Citizenship Act again. No, because I’m focused on what really matters here, which is timely access for people, no matter what ethnic background they have. Everybody who wants to become a citizen should have timely access to an acceptance or a decline,” she said.
Pressed on whether ethnicity should be a factor, the Minister pushed back.
“I don’t believe it should. I look at all of the facts that are in front of us and I don’t believe anybody, when they’re going for citizenship, should be given citizenship based on their race. It should be based on the facts of the case, not because someone was wanting something different.”
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon emphasised equal treatment.
“We have the same rule for everyone,” he said.
When asked by Te Ao Māori News if he would take the Tribunal’s eventual recommendations and report into account, he wasn’t clear.
“The issue is before the Tribunal and I will let them make their own deliberations. But all I’m just saying to you is all New Zealanders would be treated equally with regard to our citizenship. The Waitangi Tribunal will go through its process and make its own determinations. Just saying to you, if you ask me for my view on it — it is that all New Zealanders are equal, and all New Zealanders are equal under the law.”
Labour leader Chris Hipkins acknowledged the growing cohort of New Zealanders affected but stopped short of committing to change.
“I’m not gonna get involved in the tribunal considerations. Look, generally speaking, we should be making sure that the law around citizenship caters for all New Zealanders.
“What’s important to me in this particular issue is that it’s highlighted that a number of New Zealanders born overseas will be having kids now and having difficulty having their kids’ New Zealand citizenship recognised. That is something that we need to deal with, and I think it’s a very legitimate issue.”
Hipkins was asked whether he would support a reform or review of the 1977 legislation given how evidnece in front of the Tribunal has determined as such. He did not make a commitment.
Tribunal Inquiry Day 2 finishes
On day two of the inquiry, Internal Affairs officials Melanie Carpinter and Adrian Jarvis outlined how citizenship operates under the Act and how applications from children of citizens by descent are handled.
They confirmed four routes to citizenship: by birth in New Zealand or the Realm, by descent if born overseas to a parent who is a citizen otherwise than by descent, by grant under section 8 of the Citizenship Act 1977, and under the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982.
While the standard section 8 pathway requires presence days, good character, English, knowledge of responsibilities and an intention to reside, section 9 provides special-case discretion for minors, for children of citizens by descent, for exceptional humanitarian circumstances, and to avoid statelessness.
All applications under the provision relating to children of citizens by descent must be referred to the Minister for a decision, and officials said each case is assessed individually.
In doing so, the Minister may consider longstanding familial or whakapapa ties, New Zealand-based whānau, and the reasons an applicant seeks citizenship.
However, on Wednesday, van Velden was clear that she did not take race or whether an applicant is Māori into consideration.
Officials said there are no set evidential requirements; applicants choose what to provide, which can include iwi membership documents, Māori Land Court records, family trees and supporting letters.
From 2021 to today, there have been about 160 submissions under the children by descent provision. Fourteen explicitly noted whakapapa Māori ties to New Zealand, and all fourteen were approved by the Minister.
The average processing time for section 9 applications has fallen from 205.7 days in 2023 to 131.4 days so far in 2025.
Separately, van Velden said operational backlogs have been reduced, stating it used to take 11 months just to open a file in the Citizenship Office and that it is now taking about two months, the fastest in five years.
Together, the evidence argues that whakapapa-based belonging, iwi and hapū self-determination, and rights to land, culture, and non-discrimination are undermined when Māori children born overseas cannot lawfully live in Aotearoa without ministerial discretion or lengthy processes.
If the Tribunal finds breaches, potential proposed remedies could include a clear whakapapa-based pathway for Māori born overseas to be recognised as of right, culturally appropriate evidential standards, and streamlined agency processes to prevent tamariki being excluded while applications are processed.
However, based on the responses from politicians today, it is unlikely the Tribunal findings will be front of mind for the government.
The hearing is in its closing submission phase and its report likely to be released in the coming months.
The two-day hearing, presided over by Judge Alana Thomas, was brought by a claim from John Ruddock (Ngāpuhi), a New Zealand citizen by descent who says he faced “demeaning” processes and major barriers when trying to secure citizenship for his three children, all born in the United States.
After becoming their sole caregiver, he brought his tamariki home in April 2025 only to find they were not automatically recognised as citizens.
“I had always believed they were entitled to be recognised as tangata whenua here… We are tangata whenua, not tangata tiriti,” he told the Tribunal.
His evidence described the emotional toll of watching his children isolated from school while visa applications and ministerial interventions dragged on.
Actor and producer Keisha Castle-Hughes also gave evidence in the hearing.
Born in Australia to a Māori mother, she told the Tribunal that when she applied for a passport for her daughter born in the United States, she received a letter stating the child had no claim to New Zealand citizenship because she herself was a citizen by descent.
What followed, she said, were four years of confusion between government agencies over whether the matter belonged with Internal Affairs or Immigration.
“The Government wanted proof of how much time I had spent on the marae and whether I was participating in Māori culture… That is not quantifiable to us,” she said.
Although her daughter was eventually granted citizenship through political intervention, Castle-Hughes warned the issue remained unresolved for future generations.
“The grant of citizenship for our daughter does not resolve our issues… She is in the exact same boat unless she has her future tamariki in Aotearoa.”
At the heart of the case is whether the Citizenship Act 1977 and the way it is applied are consistent with Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which the Tribunal, the Crown, claimants and expert witnesses have been deliberating.
