Keokani Kipona Kapahua-Kaʻilikea
  • Heahea
    • Palapalaʻāina Kahua
    • Nā Nīnau Pinepine
    • Hoʻokaʻaʻike
  • No Aʻu
    • Pāheona
    • Nā Puke Punahele
    • Nā Līpine Punahele
    • Nā Kumu Hoʻohālike
    • ʻOihana
  • ʻOhana
    • Moʻolelo ʻAi
    • Kaʻilikea-Marciel
    • No Kuʻu Mākua
  • Nā Hana Punahele
    • Lāʻau Ola >
      • Papa Hana ʻAi
      • ʻAoʻao ʻAi
      • Kumu Waiwai Kūloko >
        • Palapalaʻāina
      • Kānela Wikiō
      • NutritionFacts.org
    • Kolepa Pōpō Pālānai >
      • Kānela Wikiō
    • Nā Palapalaʻāina
    • Nā Kānela Wikiō
    • ʻAoʻao Meetup
  • ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Mua ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Nā Wikiō ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Puke Wehewehe ʻŌlelo
    • Wehewehe Wikiwiki
    • ʻAoʻao ʻŌlelo
  • Aloha ʻĀina
    • Ka Paio Hanohano
    • Hana ʻImi Naʻauao >
      • Hoʻolilo ʻana Kelikoli
      • Kānāwai Hoʻomalu
      • Kumukānāwai Aupuni
      • Lōkahi Aupuni Hawaiʻi >
        • He Hui Manaʻo Lōkahi
      • Meaʻai Maoli
      • Mōʻaukala Lāhui
    • Nā Mele Aloha ʻĀina
    • Noho Hewa
  • Hāʻawi Wale
    • Cash App
    • PayPal
    • Venmo

KA PAIO HANOHANO
The Honorable Struggle

Exploding the Myth that 94% of Hawaiʻi Voted for American Statehood in 1959

8/16/2019

1 Comment

 
Picture

By Keokani Kipona Marciel

35% of Those Eligible Voted for American Statehood

The number of those eligible to vote who voted for statehood in 1959 was 132,773. When this number is divided by the 140,744 who voted on the statehood question, the percentage is 94%. When divided by the voter turnout of 171,383, the percentage drops to 77%. When divided by the 183,118 registered voters, the percentage drops to 73%. When divided by the 381,859 people eligible to vote in Hawaiʻi, the percentage drops to 35%.

35% Does Not Constitute a Mandate for a Plebiscite

While a 35% yes vote (from a 45% turnout) would be acceptable in a domestic election, it does not constitute a mandate for a plebiscite under customary international practice.

65% of Those Eligible Did Not Vote for American Statehood

Why did 65% of those eligible not vote for statehood in 1959? For some, it could have been a way to boycott the prolonged belligerent occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom by the US. Others, perceiving correctly that Hawaiʻi would remain occupied regardless of the outcome of the statehood vote, may have decided that it was therefore meaningless to vote on the question. Another possible line of reasoning would be that the actions of registering to vote, then voting in the general election, conducted by an unlawful government during prolonged occupation, would justify its presence. These potential reasons why 65% did not choose statehood are not unlikely given the voter disfranchisement that the Hawaiian population had endured for 72 years since the insurgency began in 1887 (with the so-called "bayonet constitution").

63% Nonparticipation Does Not Speak Well for the Occupying Power

Notwithstanding the fraudulence of the American statehood vote during belligerent occupation in 1959, under the pretense of a plebiscite, the occupying power cannot absolve itself of responsibility for the 63% nonparticipation by transferring that responsibility to the population of the occupied territory. The 63% nonparticipation reflects adversely—not on the inhabitants of the occupied territory—but on the occupying power for its ineffectiveness in persuading that 63% to register and vote in its unlawful plebiscite. That ineffectiveness, it stands to reason, has everything to do with 72 years of insurgency and belligerent occupation up to that time, stemming from the failure to produce a bilateral treaty of cession between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States. Worse, there were two failed attempts by the puppet regime (in 1893 and 1897) to enter a treaty of (illegal) annexation with its parent—they couldn't even achieve that! The result is an untrustworthiness that is accurately reflected in the 63% nonparticipation, which can more appropriately be interpreted as a boycott at the collective gut level, rather than voter apathy.

Pretense of a Plebiscite During Prolonged Occupation

The 1959 vote for US statehood purported to be a plebiscite. This is invalid because there were only two choices: become a US state (by voting "yes"); or remain a US territory (by voting "no"). In either case, Hawaiʻi would remain under belligerent occupation by the US​​ due to the absence of a bilateral treaty of cession between the US and the Hawaiian Kingdom. So, with no other choice, the majority of those who voted on the question chose the lesser of the two evils. After 66 years of being prohibited from choosing the top official in control of Hawaiʻi's government, they could now elect the governor.

Not included as options on the plebiscite were de-occupation, or the choices for decolonization: independence, free association, and commonwealth. If the organizers of the statehood question were confident that a majority would vote for US statehood (albeit under occupation without a treaty), there would be no need to exclude the aforementioned continuum of options for greater autonomy than joining a federation (US statehood).

Why is Hawaiʻi Under Belligerent Occupation?

On January 16, 1893, a company of US Marines from the USS Boston, under a false pretext of public safety for American nationals, unlawfully invaded the Hawaiian Kingdom, a neutral nation-state. On the next day, January 17, 1893, the US Marines provided a protectorate for thirteen haole insurgents to unlawfully seize the Hawaiian Kingdom government through a fake revolution, installing a puppet regime calling themselves the "Provisional Government." This insurgent militia immediately submitted a proposed annexation treaty to the United States, but US President Grover Cleveland withdrew it from the US Senate after learning about the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom government.

​Having failed to obtain an (illegal) annexation treaty with the US, the insurgent militia renamed itself to the "Republic of Hawaii," on July 4, 1894.


After a proposed annexation treaty failed for the second time, in 1898, the US Congress enacted a joint resolution to unilaterally seize the Hawaiian Islands, using the Spanish-American War as a pretext. A joint resolution is an agreement between both houses of the legislature in one nation, not between the legislative and executive branches of two nations. Therefore, a congressional joint resolution enacted within a nation is confined to its  domestic borders, having no legal force and effect in a foreign nation. This is true under both international law and US constitutional law (as interpreted through customary practice).

On June 14, 1900, US Congress passed an organic act, renaming its puppet regime, the "Republic of Hawaiʻi," to the "Territory of Hawaiʻi." However, it was no less a domestic law than the joint resolution of 1898. Therefore, it too did not annex the Hawaiian Islands to the United States, nor did it claim to. Instead, it defined its territory as the islands acquired by the joint resolution, which is legally impossible in lieu of a bilateral treaty of cession.

Third Name Change for the Occupation in 1959

On August 21, 1959, following the fraudulent plebiscite held on June 27, 1959, ​US President Dwight Eisenhower signed into law the congressional act, purporting to admit the occupied "Territory of Hawaiʻi" as the "50th State." Hence, the belligerent occupation changed its name for the third time in 67 years, this time to the "State of Hawaiʻi," which is an armed force of the US, pretending to be a lawful government.

1959 Statehood Admission Does Not Claim to Annex the Hawaiian Islands

The act by which the US government allegedly admitted Hawaiʻi as its "50th State" in 1959 is congressional legislation, domestic in its operation, with no legal force and effect beyond the borders of the 49 US states—all of which were acquired by treaties of cession, unlike Hawaiʻi. Therefore, the statehood admission act of 1959 could no more annex Hawaiʻi than could the joint resolution of 1898 or the organic act of 1900. Nor does the 1959 statehood act claim to annex the Hawaiian Islands.

Instead, the "State of Hawaiʻi" defines its territory as that which was in the "Territory of Hawaiʻi." In turn, the "Territory of Hawaiʻi" defined its territory as those islands acquired by the joint resolution. Therefore, due to the impossibility of annexing foreign territory with a joint resolution, the so-called "State of Hawaiʻi" never acquired any territory, nor did any of its three previous incarnations. Consequently, this fake state—as it is accurately referred to today in the Hawaiian Kingdom under belligerent occupation—does not legally exist beyond the borders of the 49 states of the US. With an alleged territory inherited from the joint resolution of 1898, which had no ability to annex the Hawaiian territory, the so-called "50th State" admittedly has no territory. By analogy, one can say that an empty container exists, but it is empty nonetheless.
The boundaries of the State of Hawaii shall be as prescribed in the Act of Congress approved March 18, 1959 ...
—U.S. Territory of Hawaii. (1959, June 27). General election  (Official ballot, statehood admission, proposition 2).
​The State of Hawaii shall consist of all the islands, together with their appurtenant reefs and territorial waters, included in the Territory of Hawaii on the date of enactment of this Act, except the atoll known as Palmyra Island, together with its appurtenant reefs and territorial waters, but said State shall not be deemed to include the Midway Islands, Johnston Island, Sand Island (off-shore from Johnston Island), or Kingman Reef, together with their appurtenant reefs and territorial waters.
—U.S. Congress. (1959, March 18). Act to provide for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union (Public Law 86–3, 73 Stat. 4, § 2).
That the islands acquired by the United States of America under an Act of Congress entitled "JOINT RESOLUTION To provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States." approved July seventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, shall be known as the Territory of Hawaii.
—U.S. Congress. (1900, April 30). Chap. 339.--An act to provide a government for the Territory of Hawaii (Sec. 2).

Texas Not a Valid Precedent for Hawaiʻi

Under the US Constitution, the power of Congress is clearly domestic in scope, with no enumerated power to engage directly in foreign affairs. The power to enter treaties is vested jointly in the President and Senate. Therefore, while Congress does have the constitutional power to admit states, it can only do so from territory already annexed through a bilateral international instrument.

When Congress adopted a joint resolution to acquire Texas in 1845, it did so as a statehood admission and not as a territorial annexation. The territory of Texas was not annexed until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, ratifying the premature admission of Texas as a state three years earlier.

In 1898, US Congress did not adopt a joint resolution to admit Hawaiʻi as a state, as it had done with Texas in 1845. Instead, the joint resolution adopted by Congress in 1898 purported to annex Hawaiʻi as an unincorporated territory, which was without precedent. Nor did it set a new precedent for subsequent territorial annexations by the US and other world powers.

Consecutive Domestic Laws and Name Changes Do Not Equal a Treaty

While a single congressional act of one nation cannot unilaterally acquire the territory of another nation, neither can a series, or sum, of consecutive domestic laws. In the case of Hawaiʻi, the joint resolution of 1898, the organic act of 1900, and the statehood admission act of 1959, cannot be construed by summation as equivalent to a bilateral treaty of cession between the US and the Hawaiian Kingdom, which has never been produced. This is especially true after the two failures to annex Hawaiʻi through a senate treaty for (illegal) annexation in 1893 and 1898. 

Just as consecutive domestic laws cannot add up to a treaty, neither can the four successive names of the ongoing belligerent occupation of the Hawaiian Islands since January 17, 1893: "Provisional Government," "Republic of Hawaiʻi," "Territory of Hawaiʻi," and "State of Hawaiʻi."

Hawaiʻi  Already Achieved Statehood in 1843

The Hawaiian Kingdom achieved formal recognition of its independence as a sovereign state, on November 28, 1843, through joint proclamation by Great Britain and France. On July 6, 1844, the US formally recognized the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent state. Having secured this international recognition from the three major naval powers of the world at the time, the Hawaiian Kingdom became the first non-European country to enter the Family of Nations. Since that time, a bilateral treaty of cession has never been produced to terminate the Hawaiian Kingdom as a sovereign and independent state. The unlawful seizure of the government, and prolonged occupation of the country, since January 17, 1893, is not a recognized mode of state extinction under international law.

Since Hawaiʻi already achieved international statehood in 1843, which has never been lost to a treaty of cession, said statehood of the Hawaiian Kingdom has never ceased to exist. International statehood does not have an expiration date, and therefore does not need to be renewed after a lapse of time. Nor did the 1959 statehood act by the US supersede or replace the statehood already achieved by Hawaiʻi in 1843, since the 1959 statehood admission is merely congressional legislation of the US confined in its operation to the borders of its 49 states.

Time Elapsed During Occupation Has Not Extinguished the Hawaiian Kingdom

Under international law, there is a recognized mode of state extinction through the passage of time, called prescription or acquiescence. The Hawaiian Kingdom government, through both its legislative and executive branches, never acquiesced to being succeeded by another government. Furthermore, due to the abundant history of protest since the insurgency began in 1887, and since the occupation began in 1893, a prescription claim by the US to the sovereignty and territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom cannot be substantiated under international law. Nor has the US ever made such a claim. The only official claim that the US has ever made for acquiring the sovereignty and territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom, is through the joint resolution of 1898. However, annexation of a foreign country by unilateral declaration, in the form of a congressional joint resolution, has been thoroughly refuted by simple logic and by the foremost scholars on the subject.

The pretense of statehood in 1959 occurred 72 years after the insurgency began in 1887, 66 years since the belligerent occupation began in 1893, and 61 years after the pretense of annexation by joint resolution in 1898. This gave the US more than 6 decades to transfer portions of its military and civilian populations into the occupied Hawaiian territory, and to denationalize the national population of the occupied territory through propaganda—actions that are considered war crimes under international law. This process, tantamount to stuffing the ballot box for the statehood vote in 1959, further negate any potential claim by the US to Hawaiian sovereignty and territory through prescription.

References

  • Beers, A. (2019, May 24). Hawai‘i: The fake state – Dr. David Keanu Sai talks to the Maui County Council about the ongoing American occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Retrieved from https://mauitime.com/news/politics/hawaii-the-fake-state-dr-david-keanu-sai-talks-to-the-maui-county-council-about-the-ongoing-american-occupation-of-the-hawaiian-kingdom/
  • Cardwell, E. K. [Free Hawaiʻi Broadcasting Network]. (2015, May 31). 50th State fraud: A visit with Williamson Chang [Video file].  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIOh5KMqXfA
  • PBS Hawaiʻi. (2013, July 19). Insights: Native Hawaiian sovereignty [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViQWXH-nVtA
  • Saiki, A. (2009, May 12). The Statehood plebiscite. Retrieved from http://imipono.org/2009/05/12/the-statehood-plebiscite/
  • State of Hawaiʻi, Office of Elections. Registration & turnout statistics. Retrieved from https://elections.hawaii.gov/resources/registration-voter-turnout-statistics/
  • Think Tech Hawaiʻi. (2014, September 3). The ongoing fight for Justice in Hawaii [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC4v0k0wd0Y

Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ʻĀina i ka Pono

Territorial Cession
Customary International Law
Legal Status of Hawaiʻi
Deciding the Question

1 Comment
Douglas Nabeshima
8/16/2019 01:31:28 pm

Mahalo, for this insight ,Getting older and never thought of looking for this in our History.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    KA PAIO HANOHANO
    THE HONORABLE STRUGGLE


    NO KA MEA KĀKAU
    ABOUT THE AUTHOR

    Picture
    He Hawaiʻi Aloha ʻĀina au, mau a mau, he mamo haʻaheo a kuʻu tūtū wahine nui ʻelua, Loke Kaʻilikea, no Kaupō, Maui, Ko Hawaiʻi Pae ʻĀina
    Keokani Kipona Marciel is a great-great grandson of Loke Kaʻilikea (1857-1914), of Kaupō, Maui, who signed the historic Petition Against Annexation in 1897, which defeated the proposed treaty of illegal annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by a foreign country in 1898. Inspired by that legacy, Keokani is a founding member of Pilina Aloha ʻĀina Kauʻāina (International Hawaiian Patriotic Union).

    Keokani is a Professional Registered Parliamentarian accredited by the National Association of Parliamentarians, and is a member of the American Institute of Parliamentarians. He currently serves as the Parliamentarian for the National Education Association of Southern Nevada.

    Hana ʻImi Naʻauao
    Scholarship
    Hāʻawi Wale
    Support My Work

    Nā Papaʻa - Archives

    December 2020
    May 2020
    November 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    December 2018
    April 2018
    October 2017
    January 2016

    Nā Mahele - Categories

    All
    Americanized Hawaiians
    Belligerent Occupation
    Denationalization
    Deoccupaton
    Hawaiian Kingdom
    Hawaiian Patriotic Societies
    Ko Hawaii Pae Aina
    La Hoihoi Ea
    Lahui Hawaii Aloha Aina
    La Kuokoa
    Mauna Kea
    No Treaty Of Cession
    Olelo Hawaii
    Organizational Procedure
    Renationalization

    RSS Feed

Heahea | No Aʻu | ʻOhana | Nā Hana Punahele | ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi | Aloha ʻĀina​ | Hāʻawi Wale

Kulia i ka Nuʻu!

​Kuleana kope 2016-2021 Keokani Kipona Kapahua-Kaʻilikea
  • Heahea
    • Palapalaʻāina Kahua
    • Nā Nīnau Pinepine
    • Hoʻokaʻaʻike
  • No Aʻu
    • Pāheona
    • Nā Puke Punahele
    • Nā Līpine Punahele
    • Nā Kumu Hoʻohālike
    • ʻOihana
  • ʻOhana
    • Moʻolelo ʻAi
    • Kaʻilikea-Marciel
    • No Kuʻu Mākua
  • Nā Hana Punahele
    • Lāʻau Ola >
      • Papa Hana ʻAi
      • ʻAoʻao ʻAi
      • Kumu Waiwai Kūloko >
        • Palapalaʻāina
      • Kānela Wikiō
      • NutritionFacts.org
    • Kolepa Pōpō Pālānai >
      • Kānela Wikiō
    • Nā Palapalaʻāina
    • Nā Kānela Wikiō
    • ʻAoʻao Meetup
  • ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Mua ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Nā Wikiō ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi
    • Puke Wehewehe ʻŌlelo
    • Wehewehe Wikiwiki
    • ʻAoʻao ʻŌlelo
  • Aloha ʻĀina
    • Ka Paio Hanohano
    • Hana ʻImi Naʻauao >
      • Hoʻolilo ʻana Kelikoli
      • Kānāwai Hoʻomalu
      • Kumukānāwai Aupuni
      • Lōkahi Aupuni Hawaiʻi >
        • He Hui Manaʻo Lōkahi
      • Meaʻai Maoli
      • Mōʻaukala Lāhui
    • Nā Mele Aloha ʻĀina
    • Noho Hewa
  • Hāʻawi Wale
    • Cash App
    • PayPal
    • Venmo