Royal seal of the Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi
    Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi

    Office of the Aliʻi Nui · Legal Foundations

    The Legal Foundations of thePolynesian Kingdom of Atooi

    The Kingdom understands Hawaiian political and governmental continuity through Hawaiian history, Kingdom law, the historic international relations of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and the principles of international law that apply to Indigenous peoples and to states. This page sets out that understanding and the record on which it rests. Each entry states its subject, its source, the record itself, and the Kingdom's position.

    The Kingdom's position is that no lawful act extinguished the Hawaiian state. That is the Kingdom's legal position; it has not been adopted by a court, by the United States, by the State of Hawaiʻi or by the United Nations.

    The position is contested and is not accepted by any state. No ISO or United Nations country code has been issued to the Kingdom.

    Enacted U.S. LawFederal Court RecordGovernment ArchivesTraditional Record

    How This Page Is Organised

    Historic Record, International Principle, Contemporary Government

    Ten entries are published. Six concern the historical Hawaiian Kingdom and its international relations; four concern the contemporary Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi. The two groups are kept apart, so that a nineteenth-century Hawaiian Kingdom instrument is never read as a modern Atooi instrument. Where the Kingdom draws a conclusion from a record, it is given as the Kingdom's position.

    Part One · Historic International Relations

    The Historical Hawaiian Kingdom — Instruments and Records

    Instruments and records of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: the recognition of Hawaiian independence, the constitutions of the Hawaiian Kingdom, the executive and legislative record of the United States, and the arbitral record at The Hague. These are the historical background to the Kingdom's position and are not contemporary Atooi instruments.

    01

    Component I · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · Recognition

    Outside-institution act

    The 1843 Anglo-French Proclamation

    Subject
    The Hawaiian Kingdom was recognised in the nineteenth century as an independent state within the family of nations.
    Source
    U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian — Guide to Country Recognition: HawaiiGovernment source. The underlying British and French Foreign Office records are held at The National Archives, Kew (series FO 58, Hawaiian Islands).
    The record
    On 28 November 1843 Great Britain and France jointly declared that they regarded the Sandwich Islands (Hawaiʻi) as an independent state and undertook never to take possession of them. The United States separately extended recognition and concluded treaties with the Hawaiian monarchs.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that international recognition of Hawaiian statehood in 1843 is the starting point of a continuity argument: a state so recognised does not cease to exist without a lawful act extinguishing it.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    28 November 1843Great BritainFranceRecognition of Independence
    Read the Source
    02

    Component II · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · Constitutional Record

    Outside-institution act

    The Constitutions of the Hawaiian Kingdom

    Subject
    The historical Hawaiian Kingdom governed itself under written constitutions, principally the Constitution of 1864.
    Source
    Hawaiʻi State Archives — constitutional records of the Hawaiian KingdomGovernment repository holding the original instruments. A full transcription of the 1864 Constitution is published on this site; the widely circulated online transcription at hawaii-nation.org is a secondary, non-archival copy and is cited only as a convenience.
    The record
    The Hawaiian Kingdom adopted written constitutions in 1840, 1852, 1864 and 1887, establishing a monarch, a legislature and a judiciary, and defining who held office and how offices were filled.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that the constitutional order of the historical Hawaiian Kingdom was never lawfully repealed, and that its constitutional line therefore remains the frame of reference for Hawaiian governance.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    1840 · 1852 · 1864 · 1887Constitutional RecordHawaiʻi State Archives
    Read the Source
    03

    Component III · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · Executive Record

    Outside-institution act

    President Cleveland's Message to Congress, 18 December 1893

    Subject
    A sitting United States President reported to Congress that the 1893 overthrow was unlawful and called for restoration of the monarchy.
    Source
    Foreign Relations of the United States, 1894, Appendix II: Affairs in Hawaii — U.S. Department of State, Office of the HistorianOfficial published record of the United States government. The transcription at hawaii-nation.org is a secondary copy.
    The record
    President Grover Cleveland reported to Congress on the events of January 1893, described the overthrow as an act of war committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without the authority of Congress, and asked that the monarchy be restored. Congress did not act on that request.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that this executive admission means the change of government in 1893 had no lawful foundation, and that nothing lawful followed from it.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    18 December 1893Grover ClevelandMessage to CongressFRUS 1894
    Read the Source
    04

    Component IV · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · United States Statute

    Outside-institution act

    The Newlands Resolution, 7 July 1898

    Subject
    Hawaiʻi was annexed by a joint resolution of Congress rather than by a ratified treaty.
    Source
    Joint Resolution No. 55, 30 Stat. 750 (7 July 1898) — enacted text, GovInfoEnacted federal law as printed in the United States Statutes at Large.
    The record
    The enacted text recites that the Republic of Hawaii consented to cede all rights of sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands and the fee and ownership of all public, Government or Crown lands, and provides for annexation by joint resolution. A treaty of annexation had failed to obtain the two-thirds Senate majority required for ratification.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that a joint resolution is an instrument of domestic law and cannot, of itself, transfer the sovereignty of a foreign state; on that reading the 1898 annexation was ineffective in international law.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    7 July 189830 Stat. 750Joint ResolutionAnnexation
    Read the Source
    05

    Component V · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · United States Statute

    Documentary record

    The Apology Resolution — Public Law 103-150 (1993)

    Subject
    Congress acknowledged the illegality of the 1893 overthrow and apologised for the participation of United States agents and citizens in it.
    Source
    Public Law 103-150, 107 Stat. 1510 (23 November 1993) — enacted text, Congress.govEnacted federal law. Every quotation below is taken directly from the enacted text as printed in the Statutes at Large.
    The record
    Section 1 states that the Congress “acknowledges the historical significance” of “the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893”, which “resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people”, and “apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination”. A recital states that “the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum”. Section 3 states in full: “Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States.”
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that a congressional acknowledgment of illegality, coupled with the recital that sovereignty was never relinquished, supports a continuing Indigenous sovereign claim.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    23 November 1993Public Law 103-150107 Stat. 1510Apology Resolution
    Read the Source
    06

    Component VI · Historical Hawaiian Kingdom · International Arbitration

    Outside-institution act

    Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom — Permanent Court of Arbitration, Case No. 1999-01

    Subject
    The continuity of the Hawaiian Kingdom has been placed before an international arbitral tribunal.
    Source
    Permanent Court of Arbitration — Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, Case No. 1999-01Institutional record of the arbitral institution, including the 2001 award. The respondent in that arbitration was a separate organisation; the Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi was not a party.
    The record
    An arbitration between a private individual and a body describing itself as the Hawaiian Kingdom was administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague between 1999 and 2001. The tribunal declined to decide the merits, holding that it could not do so in the absence of the United States, which was not and could not be made a party.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that the acceptance of the case for administration, and the tribunal's engagement with the continuity question, show that the status of the Hawaiian state is a live question in international law.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    1999 — 2001PCA Case No. 1999-01The HagueNo Merits Decision
    Read the Source

    Part Two · The Modern Legal Record

    The Contemporary Kingdom — Lineage and Proceedings

    The customary lineage of Kauaʻi, and the modern proceedings involving the Aliʻi Nui and members of the Kingdom. Each proceeding is described by its actual disposition, taken from the source cited with it.

    07

    Component VII · Contemporary PKOA · Customary Lineage

    Oral or traditional testimony

    The Distinct Sovereign Line of Kauaʻi

    Subject
    Kauaʻi, the seat of the Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi, entered the unified Hawaiian Kingdom by accord rather than by conquest, and retained a distinct sovereign identity.
    Source
    Hawaiian oral tradition and the nineteenth-century historical record of the Kaumualiʻi–Kamehameha accordTraditional and custodial record. No single archival instrument in the Kingdom's holdings evidences this component; it rests on oral tradition and published histories.
    The record
    The historical record and Hawaiian tradition record that Kauaʻi was not militarily conquered by Kamehameha, and that Kaumualiʻi came to terms with him rather than being defeated in battle.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom's position is that the unconquered status of Kauaʻi preserves a separate sovereign line from which the contemporary Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi descends.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    KauaʻiKaumualiʻiAccord, not conquestTraditional record
    09

    Component IX · Contemporary PKOA · Federal Court Record

    Documentary record

    Private-Search Ruling — Federal Narcotics Case, CR No. 14-00032 DKW

    Subject
    Evidence gathered by members affiliated with the Kingdom was considered in a federal prosecution.
    Source
    United States District Court, District of Hawaiʻi — CR No. 14-00032 DKW, order (GovInfo)Official federal court document. A copy also appears on CaseMine; that is a secondary reproduction and is not relied on here.
    The record
    Members affiliated with the Kingdom conducted a private investigation that contributed information and evidence to a federal narcotics prosecution. The court analysed the matter under the private-search doctrine and treated the participants as private citizens, not as federal or local law-enforcement agents.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom includes this record as documentation of the conduct of its members, and not as evidence of recognition.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    CR No. 14-00032 DKWPrivate-Search DoctrineTreated as private citizens
    Read the Source
    10

    Component X · Contemporary PKOA · Procedural Disposition

    Documentary record

    The 2019 Office of Hawaiian Affairs Case — Dismissed on Speedy-Trial Grounds

    Subject
    Felony charges arising from the January 2019 events at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs headquarters were dismissed.
    Source
    “Charges dismissed in case of the 2019 takeover of OHA’s headquarters” — iLind.net, 5 September 2024Independent journalism reporting on the court file. The underlying circuit court order is not held in the Kingdom's archive.
    The record
    As reported, six men were charged in connection with events at the OHA headquarters in January 2019. Initial misdemeanour charges were withdrawn and a state grand jury indicted the six in December 2021 on charges of kidnapping, assault and terroristic threatening. On 12 August 2024 Circuit Court Judge Faʻauuga Toʻotoʻo dismissed the charges without prejudice for violation of the speedy-trial rule (Hawaiʻi Rules of Penal Procedure, Rule 48), a violation the State conceded. Dismissal without prejudice means charges may be refiled at the discretion of prosecutors. The same report states that the allegations were that men identifying themselves as officers of the Kingdom entered the headquarters, took control of it, assaulted two employees and threatened others, and announced they were there to seize the agency's assets and arrest trustees; and that four defendants argued unsuccessfully that the State of Hawaiʻi is not a lawful entity and that the court lacked jurisdiction over them as marshals of the Kingdom. Those are the allegations and arguments described in the source. They were never tried, and no court made any finding on them.
    The Kingdom's position
    The Kingdom records the disposition of the proceeding. It does not treat the dismissal as a vindication of the conduct alleged or of the jurisdictional argument advanced by the defendants.
    Date last reviewed
    6 September 2026
    2019 — 2024HRPP Rule 48Dismissed without prejudiceAllegations untried
    Read the Source

    Part Three · The Kingdom Today

    The Contemporary Exercise of Government

    The Kingdom maintains a Head of State, a Council of Ministers, a Royal Household, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs & International Relations and other offices, which act under the Kingdom's own governing instruments. It issues royal decrees, conducts correspondence and delegations, maintains relationships with Indigenous nations and traditional leaders, participates in international forums, and keeps a public archive of its records.

    Government StructureCouncil of MinistersMinistry of Foreign Affairs & International RelationsGoverning FrameworkRoyal DecreesInternational RelationsKingdom Records

    Part Four

    Sources and Further Reading

    Where an enacted law, court record or government archive exists, it is cited in preference to any encyclopedic or advocacy summary. The primary materials are listed at the foot of this page and held in the Kingdom's collections. Additional records will be added as they are prepared for publication.

    Court RecordsTreatiesGoverning InstrumentsRoyal DecreesHistorical LawArchival SourcesInternational Materials

    Sources Cited on This Page

    Primary references

    Source categories indicate provenance and evidentiary weight. Classification does not determine the ultimate legal interpretation of a record.

    How to Cite This Page

    Suggested citation

    Office of the Aliʻi Nui, Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi. "The Legal Foundations of the Polynesian Kingdom of Atooi." Last updated September 6, 2026. https://kingdomofatooi.com/legal-foundations

    When reproducing material from this page in academic, legal, or journalistic work, please retain the retrieval date and cite the underlying primary sources linked above directly wherever practicable.

    Corrections may be sent to the secure inquiry form.

    Last reviewed 2026-09-18