In New Zealand Maori-medium education has developed greatly under the Maori principle, kaupapa Maori promoting unique school systems such as Te Kohanga Reo or Kura Kaupapa Maori. The principle depends on the critical theory that awakens suppressed people by colonial western culture and leads them to the resistance and praxis for their liberation. However the progress of the Maori education appears to be less in the new millennium as ethnic diversity among Maori people as well as that in New Zealand society has become prominent. The decline of Maori education by kaupapa Maori comes partly from the limited application of critical theory to the decolonization but not to the post-colonization. The inspection of the Maori education at an early stage indicates cross-cultural elements in Maori initiatives without any influence of the critical theory. The innovation of kaupapa Maori and tikanga Maori could be attained through the cross-cultural struggles retaining intrinsic Maori values and protocols.
The parliamentary system of New Zealand was classified as a typical Westminster case by Arend Lijphart and many others. However, the perusal of rich empirical data leads us to qualify such an overly generalised statement in a significant way. One needs to jettison the old stereotypical view of the New Zealand system for a more nuanced view. The Westminster model, widely spread out all over the world, is based on the principle of 'government by the majority' with little regard for the minority. The first-past-the post electoral system tends to produce a two-party system, with a clear-cut majority forming government. The governing party with its good command of the majority seats in the lower house is free to push through all legislation to its liking. New Zealand politics in the period from around 1940 to around 1990 indeed conform in large parts to the description of the model. After the 'golden' period sans fracas over nearly half a century, many new developments took place to decentralise the system from the late 1980s into the 1990s. The most striking point was the replacement of the Single-Member, Plurality voting system by the Mixed-Member Proportional system in 1993. Ever since MMP was put in use to elect Members of Parliament in Wellington, no party in government has come to win the majority. Now, after the election, we regularly see the leader of the party with the largest number of seats negotiating with various other party leaders to form government. The cabinet ministers do frequently have to consult with the MPs sitting on the opposition side so as to pass government bills. The Maori seats, which have been in existence in New Zealand Parliament to guarantee the Maoris their representation since the 19^<th> century and which still exist in a modified form in MMP, are counteractive to the pure Westminster model. The unique Westminster version which has evolved in New Zealand since 1856 is aptly called 'Wellingminster'.
In this essay, we will make a comparative assessment of the electoral systems of Japan and New Zealand and the respective right of foreigners to vote. The last general election in New Zealand was held in 2011. Every citizen of New Zealand enjoys the right to vote under Section 12 (a) of BORA. Advocating similar provisions for suffrage, Article 15 of the Japanese Constitution states that the selection and dismissal of public officials are the inherent rights of the people. Section 2 of Article 93 also mentions that the tenure of local governments and other official members of the Congress are established by law, that is, the residents of the country elect their representatives to direct them. Comparing with New Zealand, which grants the right to vote to 'citizens' above 18, not only 'permanent residents' but also 'non-permanent residents' are recognized as "foreigners" and do not grant voting rights in Japan. In this paper, by comparing the rights of foreigners to vote in Japan and New Zealand, the author will describe the legal history related to domestic legislation of the voting rights in New Zealand.