Category Archives: Hawaiian issues

Hawaii Supreme Court formally suspends Dexter Kaiama from the practice of law

9 Replies

I wrote a long post several weeks ago about the apparent resignation of Hawaiian attorney Dexter Kaiama, who has been a prominent advocate in the courtroom of the belief that the the Hawaiian Kingdom still exists and that state and federal courts do not have authority over citizens of the Hawaiian nation.

On December 31, he announced his resignation from the practice of law and said he was giving up his law license rather than cooperate with the investigation of a complaint filed against him with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“Attorney known for arguing Hawaiian Kingdom sovereignty gives up his law license“).

Less than two weeks later, on January 11, the Hawaii Supreme Court followed up by issuing an order granting the ODC motion and suspending Kaiama’s license, citing his repeated and ongoing failure to cooperate with ODC, to respond to a legal subpoena that had been issued on October 6, 2022, or to respond to an order to “show cause” why he should not be suspended. The court’s order was effective immediately on entry.

Rule 2.16 of the Rules of the Hawaii Supreme court regarding disbarred or suspended attorneys, cited in the court order, provides, in part:

(a) A disbarred or suspended attorney shall promptly notify by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, all clients being represented in pending matters, other than litigation or administrative proceedings, of theattorney’s disbarment or suspension and consequent inability to act as an attorney after the effective date of the disbarment or suspension and shall advise said clients to seek legal advice elsewhere. A disbarred or suspended attorney shall promptly notify, or cause to be notified, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, each of the attorney’s clients who is involved in pending litigation or administrative proceedings, and the attorney or attorneys for each party and each self-represented party in the pending litigation or administrative proceeding of the attorney’s disbarment or suspension and consequent inability to act as an attorney after the effective date of the disbarment or suspension. The notice to be given to the client shall advise the client of the desirability of the prompt substitution of an other attorney or attorneys in place of the withdrawing attorney.
In the event the client does not obtain substitute counsel before the effective date of the disbarred or suspended attorney to move in the court or agency in which the proceeding is pending for leave to withdraw.

Rule 2.16 – Disbarred or suspended attorneys, Haw. R. Sup. Ct. 2.16

Exactly what the actual impact will be isn’t clear. Kaiama doesn’t appear to have taken on any new clients in the past two years, so may not have any active cases to hand off to another attorney, as the rules require.

Kaiama had already largely given up the traditional practice of law, instead treating appearances in court as occasions for repeating arguments which have no legal validity and have never succeeded in court, although they appeal to the sovereignty aspirations of many Hawaiians.

Noted collector calls for removal of Bishop Museum board

9 Replies

The following “Open Letter to the People of Hawaii” concerning the situation at Bishop Museum was posted on Facebook last week by noted Hawaiiana collector Mark Blackburn.

In a comment to his post, he gave permission for it to be shared.

Other comments on his post seem to indicate a lot of public concern in the community.

And as supporters of and contributors to the museum, Meda and I agree that the continued silence from the museum’s board is most distressing and can result in lasting damage to the institution.

An open letter to the people of Hawaii:

As someone who honors Bishop Museum and its legacy, this letter is written in the hope that things will change for the better. I am a well-known collector of Polynesian art with a history of exhibitions worldwide, and close contacts at virtually every institution in the world. My background provides me with a well-informed perspective on the current turmoil at the museum.

The Bishop Museum is extremely special, born in the era of Victorian natural history museums, yet uniquely rooted in both scientific and indigenous knowledge, and possessing an amazing, world class collection of Pacific art and ethnology from all areas of the Pacific. Its truly illustrious past is steeped in numerous scientific expeditions, enhanced by a rich Hawaii history and a huge catalog published under the Bishop Museum Press. Countless top scholars have passed through its doors, including Sir Peter Buck (once a director), Adrienne Kaeppler, and Roger Rose, just to name a few.

Yet, the museum has suffered greatly under a host of horrific directors since Donald Duckworth. The Bishop Museum was literally re-energized under the leadership of Melanie Ide, who not only brought a new vision, but also new exhibitions and public engagement under her direction. She changed the museum overnight with her energy and foresight. Melanie even obtained a 17.5-million-dollar pledge for support from the State legislature, the first time in many years, as well as other community pledges. The latest toxic episode at the Bishop Museum, triggered by the museum’s misguided board of directors, has put these pledges for funding in jeopardy. To date, the board’s actions have resulted in nothing more than a big, billable event for a Bishop Street law firm, and greatly damaged the museum’s reputation worldwide.

The current issue at hand appears to be a minor HR problem that should have been sorted out inhouse and within the ranks of the museum, instead of becoming a public spectacle. The removal of the institution’s top three officers without notice invited unhelpful and damaging speculation about serious misconduct at the museum. As someone who ran a large company on the East Coast for 36 years, I know that these issues should be dealt with internally and with discretion to avoid damage to the parties involved as well as the institution. Not only is the current situation shameful and a continued blight on the Bishop Museum, it may also prove to be the final nail in the coffin for this unique, world class institution.

Hopefully, the powers that be can remove the board of directors, set term limits for board members, and reinstate Melanie Ide as the museum’s active director. The Bishop Museum must reach out for new board members worldwide with a background in science and ethnology as well as seeking out Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners who can add a much-needed voice on the board. Once this is done, the museum can rebuild under the leadership of Melanie Ide and a new board of directors. I also suggest that the Bishop Museum mark such a new beginning by removing entrance fees for kama ‘aina and make it accessible to all the people of Hawaii in celebration of what is a remarkable Hawaii treasure.

Respectfully,

Mark Blackburn
Marfa, Texas

Two facing felony charges in 2019 takeover of OHA offices likely to raise a sovereignty defense

16 Replies

It’s been 3-1/2 years since a dozen men wearing red shirts identifying themselves as federal marshals from the Kauai group known as the Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi, stormed into the main office of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, assaulted at least two OHA employees and threatened others, and announced they were there to seize the agency’s assets and arrest “corrupt” trustees. There was a two-hour standoff before police finally gained control of the situation.

Now, after several delays, the trial of six men facing felony charges stemming from the January 17, 2019 incident is scheduled to get underway on September 19.

Five–Sadhu-Bhusana Bott, Jordan Faletogo, Ene Faletogo, also known as Ene Faletoga, Rheece Kahawai, and Peter Laban, also known as Peter Laman–
are each charged with two counts of kidnapping, a Class A felony, and a single count of 2nd degree assault, a Class C felony.

A sixth person, Remedio Dabaluz, is charged with 2nd degree asssault, also a Class C felony.

Under Hawaii law, Class A felonies have a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison if convicted, while Class C felonies carry a five year maximum.

At least two of the defendants appear likely to defend themselves by arguing that as federal marshals for the Sovereign Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi, they are beyond the jurisdiction of the state courts.

Earlier this summer, two defendants, Dabaluz and Jordan Faletogo, asked to dismiss their attorneys and represent themselves in the upcoming trial.

Emmanuel G. Guerrero, who had been representing Dabaluz, stated in a declaration filed in court that “from the inception, the attorney and client have had differing views as to the legal strategy to pursue, and whether the defenses are legally viable, and that the differences are irreconcilable.”

Debaluz’ request was approved by Circuit Court Judge Kevin T. Morikone. In an August 10 order, Morikone said he had advised Dabaluz of the dangers and disadvantages of representing himself, and also advised that “he cannot later claim that his self-representation was ineffective.” After determining Dabaluz was aware of the issues, Morikone granted his request to represent himself.

In a separate written declaration filed with the court, Dwight Lum, the attorney representing Jordan Faletogo, said he had a meeting with Faletogo on August 25 “in which it became apparent that we had divergent views of the legal strategy to pursue in regards to this case,” and that Faletogo contacted him the following day saying he wanted to represent himself.

Lum’s motion to withdraw and allow Faletogo to take over his own defense was filed last week and is pending.

It seems likely that both Dabaluz and Jordan Faletogo likely intend to argue the Hawaiian Kingdom Constitution, and international laws, protect officials of the Sovereign Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi, including its “federal marshalls,” from such charges. It sounds like a dead-end argument from a legal standpoint, but believers tend to disagree.

According to the indictment, all defendants except Dabaluz face the possiblity of an extended term of imprisonment if they are convicted and sentenced on two or more counts, thereby becoming “multiple offenders.” Ene Faletogo, according to the indictment, may also be subject to an extended term as a “persistent offender” because he was previously convicted of two or more felonies as an adult.

Indictment of six defendant… by Ian Lind

False claims about royal land patents still have followers

6 Replies

On Friday, one of those who was arrested for trespass after occupying a part of a privately-owned agricultural subdivision in Kunia reaffirmed his belief in the proposition that most Hawaii land belongs to the descendants of those who received the initial land commission awards and royal patents some 170 years ago. It’s a false or mistaken claim that has fueled this and other land seizures around the state.

Moleka Malumaleumu Leaeno Hicks, whose legal name according to court records is Morris Nathaniel Hicks, was among those arrested when police cleared the Kunia property on July 2. He was charged the prior month to trespassing on the property after he was warned but refused to leave. He is scheduled to make a preliminary appearance in the Wahiawa District Court on Monday.

In his August 19 Facebook post, Hicks publicly asserted: “Royal Patents trumps Tax Map keys and limited warranty deeds,” followed by a happy face emoji.

It doesn’t seem to matter that no court, from the Hawaiian Kingdom through the present, has upheld this claim.

Hicks, who claims the rank of sergeant in Occupied Forces Hawaii Army, a group claiming to the the military force of the Country of Hawaii, received “orders” at the beginning of the year from OFHA’s leader, who goes by the name Col. Sam Lilikoi, to join the Kunia land takeover in order to provide “security.”

He and the other squatters claim that the land’s legal owner does not really hold title to the land, which instead is claimed to be owned by the many descendants of the original royal patent holder, despite the many legal transfers of title over the intervening 170 years. They believe each descendant holds an undivided lineal interest in the property.

It isn’t clear where Hicks and others have learned this false legal theory or why they appear to cling to it so tenaciously.

At some point, a legal hammer is going to drop and someone’s going to end up paying an unfortunate price for clinging to this discredited belief.

See:

How The Story Of The ‘Army’ That Illegally Took Over A Kunia Property Is Playing On Social Media,” Civil Beat, July 22, 2022

Hawaiian ‘Occupied Forces’ Group Ousted From Kunia Property By Police, Civil Beat, July 3, 2022.

Where the frivolity never ends, iLind.net, June 25, 2022.

Courts quickly reject attempts to delay eviction of squatters on Kunia ag land, iLind.net, June 15, 2022.

Group Occupying Honolulu Pot Farm Faces Deadline To Move Out, June 12,2022.

Standoff In Waipahu: Hawaiian Rights ‘Army’ Has Illegally Occupied A Private Pot Farm, Civil Beat, June 7, 2022

False beliefs about land titles fuel property takeovers, iLind.net, June 7, 2022.