No. 97-969in the united states supreme courtoctober termdavid keanu sai, Ambassador        )    petition for writ of of the Hawaiian Kingdom            )    mandamus;  affidavit of                                    )    david keanu sai;  summons                        Petitioner,                        )                                   )                                    vs.                                )                                         )    william jefferson clinton,         )President of the United            )States of America                  )                                   )               Respondent.         )___________________________________)

petition for writ of mandamus

comes now Petitioner David Keanu Sai, Ambassador of the Hawaiian Kingdom to the United States of America, in Pro Se, and files this Petition for Writ of Mandamus under 28 U.S.C. (section)1651, as follows:

I.

Petitioner David Keanu Sai is the duly appointed, qualified, and acting Regent of the Hawaiian Kingdom and herein serves as Ambassador to the United States of America; that the Hawaiian Kingdom is a sovereign nation organized and existing under and by virtue of the Constitution and laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom, with its principal place of business at Honolulu, Island of O`ahu, Hawaiian Islands.

II.

Respondent William Jefferson Clinton is the duly elected, qualified, and acting President of the United States of America; that the United States of America is a sovereign nation organized and existing under and by virtue of the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, with its principal place of business at Washington, District of Columbia.

III.

This court has original jurisdiction of all suits brought by ambassadors, or other public ministers, or in which a consul or vice consul is a party.

IV.

The Petitioner and Respondent are parties in office to the Treaty of 1850, also known as the "most favored nation treaty," entered between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the Republic of the United States of America, and are obligated to faithfully discharge their executive duties. As such Respondent is precluded from asserting sovereign immunity from this petition, by virtue of the United States' consent to said treaty.

V.

On June 7, 1839, His Majesty Kamehameha III proposed and signed a Declaration of Rights. That Act recognized three classes of persons having "vested rights" in the lands; 1st, the Government, 2nd, the Chiefs (Landlords), and 3rd, the Native Tenants, and declared protection of life, liberty and property of both the Chiefly (Landlord) class and the Native Tenant class.

VI.

On October 8, 1840, His Majesty Kamehameha III voluntarily divested himself of his absolute powers and attributes by promulgating a constitution, which recognized the three grand divisions of a Civilized Monarchy; the King as the Chief Executive, the Judiciary, and the Legislative Council. By 1859, the Hawaiian Kingdom had established a complete system of laws, both Civil and Penal, defining rights and affording remedies.

VII.

On December 20, 1849, a Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation, between the United States of America and His Majesty Kamehameha III, the King of the Hawaiian Islands, was concluded and signed at Washington. Ratifications by both countries were exchanged at Lahaina, island of Maui, on August 24, 1850, and the treaty was in force from that date, for the term of ten years, and further until either of the contracting parties shall give notice to the other of its intention to terminate.

VIII.

On January 14, 1893, John L. Stevens, the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Hawaiian Kingdom conspired with a small group of residents of the Hawaiian Kingdom, including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the Hawaiian Government.

IX.

In pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Hawaiian Government, the United States Minister Stevens and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian Kingdom on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the `Iolani Palace to intimidate Queen Lili`uokalani and her Government.

X.

On the afternoon of January 17, 1893, a "committee of safety" that represented the American and European sugar planters, descendants of missionaries, and financiers committed the crime of high treason as defined in chapter VI, (section)1, Hawaiian Penal Code, by deposing Queen Lili`uokalani and her cabinet and proclaimed the establishment of a provisional government, and thereafter forced all government employees to sign oaths of allegiance to the same.

XI.

The United States Minister Stevens thereupon extended diplomatic recognition to the provisional government that was formed by traitors without the consent of the Hawaiian Government and in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law.

XII.

Soon thereafter, when informed of the risk of bloodshed with resistance, Queen Lili`uokalani issued the following statement "temporarily" yielding her authority to the United States Government, by its President, as a fact finder, rather than to the Provisional Government:

"I Lili`uokalani, by the Grace of God and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the Constitutional Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a Provisional Government of and for this Kingdom...Now to avoid any collision of armed forces, and perhaps the loss of life, I do this under protest and impelled by said force yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands."

XIII.

Without the active support and intervention by the United States diplomatic and military representatives, the treasonous acts against the Hawaiian Government would have failed for lack of popular support and insufficient arms.

XIV.

On February 1, 1893, the United States Minister Stevens raised the American flag and proclaimed Hawai`i to be a protectorate of the United States without the consent of the United States Congress and in violation of international law.

XV.

The report of a Presidentially established investigation conducted by former U.S. Congressman James Blount into the events surrounding the treasonous actions and overthrow of January 17, 1893, concluded that the United States diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority and were responsible for the change in government.

XVI.

As a result of this investigation, the United States Minister to Hawai`i, John L. Stevens, was recalled from his diplomatic post and the military commander of the United States armed forces stationed in Hawai`i was disciplined and forced to resign his commission.

XVII.

In a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on the illegal acts of the traitors, described such acts as an "act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress," and acknowledged that by such acts the government of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown.

XVIII.

President Cleveland further concluded that a "substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character as well as the rights of the injured people requires we should endeavor to repair" and called for the restoration of the Hawaiian Monarchy.

XIX.

On July 4, 1894, the provisional government declared itself to be the Republic of Hawai`i, and maintained their opposition to the restoration of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government as called for by United States President Grover Cleveland, aforesaid.

XX.

On June 16, 1897, a treaty of annexation was signed in Washington, D.C., between representatives of the Republic of Hawai`i and the United States of America, but said treaty remained subject to ratification by the United States Senate.

XXI.

On June 17, 1897, in Washington, D.C., Queen Lili`uokalani submitted to the Senate of the United States, a formal protest to the treaty of annexation that attempted to transfer the territory of the Hawaiian Kingdom to the United States of America, in part, to wit:

"...Because the official protests made by me on the 17th day of January, 1893, to the so-called Provisional Government was signed by me, and received by said government with the assurance that the case was referred to the United States of America for arbitration...

Because the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and an envoy commissioned by them reported in official documents that my government was unlawfully coerced by the forces, diplomatic and naval of the United States; that I was at the date of their investigation the constitutional ruler of my people...

Because said treaty ignores, not only all professions of perpetual amity and good faith made by the United States in former treaties with the sovereigns representing the Hawaiian people, but all treaties made by those sovereigns with other and friendly powers, and it is thereby in violation of international law.

Because, by treating with the parties claiming at this time the right to cede said territory of Hawai`i, the Government of the United States receives such territory from the hands of those whom its own magistrates (legally elected by the people of the United States, and in office in 1893) pronounce fraudulently in power and unconstitutionally ruling Hawai`i.

...Therefore I, Lili`uokalani of Hawai`i, do hereby call upon the President of that nation, to whom alone I yielded my property and authority, to withdraw said treaty (ceding said Islands) from further consideration. I ask the honorable Senate of the United States to decline to ratify said treaty..."

The United States Senate failed to acquire the required 2/3's vote, as mandated by the U.S. Constitution, to ratify the treaty of annexation with the Republic of Hawai`i in 1897. Consequently the United States of America was estopped from entering the territorial jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Kingdom, a sovereign nation, without standing in contravention of its own organic laws and of international law.

XXIII.

The U.S. Constitution confers absolutely on the United States government the power of making war and treaties. Consequently the United States government possesses the power of acquiring foreign territory either by conquest or by treaty. Neither conquest nor treaty of cession occurred between the Hawaiian Kingdom, a foreign territory, and the United States of America, since 1897 to the present.

XXIV.

Without a treaty of annexation by the Hawaiian Kingdom, the Joint Resolution no. 55, 54th Congress, Second Session, July 7, 1898, "purporting to provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands;" Chapter no. 339, 56th Congress, April 30, 1900, "purporting to provide a government for the Territory of Hawai`i;" and Public Law 86-3, March 18, 1959, "purporting to admit the State of Hawai`i into the Union," cannot have any effect outside of the territorial jurisdiction of the United States of America, which said jurisdiction does not include the Hawaiian Kingdom, a sovereign and independent nation.

XXV.

On November 23, 1993, the United States enacted Public Law 103-150, 103d Congress, to acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and affirmed the aforementioned facts stated in this petition.

XXVI.

The unlawful occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom by the United States, since August 12, 1898, has resulted in the denial and usurpation of native Hawaiian "vested" and "civil rights" secured to the same by the Constitution and laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

XXVII.

On December 15, 1995, the Hawaiian Kingdom Trust Company, a Hawaiian Kingdom general partnership existing under and by virtue of an "Act to Provide for the Registration of Co-partnership Firms," chapter XXVIII, Hawaiian Civil Code, p. 648, Compiled Laws, 1884, was established as a private trust to serve in the absence of the Hawaiian Kingdom government and had adopted the Hawaiian Constitution of 1864 and the laws lawfully established in the administration of the same.

XXVIII.

On March 1, 1996, the Trustees of the Hawaiian Kingdom Trust Company, aforesaid, deriving its authority from certain "deeds of trust" from native Hawaiian subjects whose rights are secured to the same under the Constitution and laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom, appointed the Petitioner to the public office of Regent in accordance with article 33 of the Constitution of 1864.

XXIX.

The Petitioner had been entrusted with the vicarious administration of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government during the absence of a Monarch, and that the Petitioner shall hold office until the Legislative body shall hereafter convene in accordance with (section)780-(section)814, Article XXXII, Hawaiian Civil Code, Compiled Laws, 1884, to confirm or amend this appointment.

XXX.

On February 28, 1997, a Proclamation by the Petitioner, aforesaid, was printed in the March 9, 1997, issue of the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser, in part:

1. The Hawaiian Monarchical system of Government is hereby re-established.

2. The Civil Code of the Hawaiian Islands as noted in the Compiled Laws of 1884, together with the session laws of 1884 and 1886 and the Hawaiian Penal Code are in full force. All Hawaiian Laws and Constitutional principles not consistent herewith are void and without effect.

3. The laws are obligatory upon all persons, whether subjects of this Kingdom, or citizens or subjects of any foreign State, while within the limits of this Kingdom, except so far as exception is made by the laws of nations in respect to Ambassadors or others. The property of all such persons, while such property in within the territorial jurisdiction of this Kingdom, is also subject to the laws.

4. Private agreements shall have no effect to contravene any law which concerns public order or good morals. But individuals may, in all cases in which it is not expressly or impliedly prohibited, renounce what the law has established in their favor, when such renunciation does not affect the rights of others, and is not contrary to the public good.

5. Whatever is done in contravention of a prohibitory law is void, although the nullity be not formally directed.

XXXI.

As Ambassador of the Hawaiian Kingdom Government to the United States of America, Petitioner applies for the writ of mandamus to this court in the first instance because the matters involved are of great public and general interest to the American citizens residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Kingdom, and whose private rights are secured to the same as mandated under Article VIII, Treaty of 1850, aforesaid.

XXXII.

A speedy determination is necessary to prevent chaos in regard to the American citizens residing in the Hawaiian Islands who have claims to real and personal property, which are profoundly affected by the reassertion of Hawaiian Kingdom law. That in order to secure American interests in these islands it is imperative that the Respondent acknowledge and adhere to its treaty obligations, under the principle of "pacta sunt servanda," and so apprise its citizens.

XXXIII.

Petitioner asserts that (1) no notice of termination of the Treaty of 1850, aforesaid, was ever made in accordance with article XVI of said treaty by either of the high contracting parties; (2) all United States laws imposed in the Hawaiian Islands are inferior to said treaty; and, (3) inferior laws which are inconsistent with said treaty cannot be enforced. Thus Petitioner invokes and claims said treaty rights and the expression of Hawaiian sovereignty in the name of the Hawaiian Kingdom, a sovereign nation. As such, relief cannot be afforded Petitioner by an appeal or by application for the issuance of the writ prayed for to any lower court.

Wherefore Petitioner request this court to grant its writ of mandamus directed to Respondent, commanding and requiring Respondent as President of the United States to undo the actions of its Government within the territorial jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Kingdom, a sovereign nation, as follows:

1. Acknowledge the treaty obligations of the United States of America as mandated under Article VI, (section)2 of the United States Constitution.

2. Immediately execute the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom, being the Civil Code of the Hawaiian Islands as noted in the Compiled Laws of 1884, together with the session laws of 1884 and 1886 and the Hawaiian Penal Code, for the control and management of public affairs and the protection of the public peace until terms of transition and complete withdrawal have been negotiated and agreed upon.

3. Require all officers under the government of the State of Hawai`i and its municipal corporations to sign oaths of allegiance to the Hawaiian Kingdom Government in accordance with (section)430 and (section)431 of the Hawaiian Civil Code, Compiled Laws, 1884, p. 105, and thereafter continue to exercise their functions and perform the duties of their respective offices in compliance with the Civil and Penal Codes of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

4. All Hawaiian laws and Constitutional principles of the Hawaiian Kingdom not inconsistent herewith shall be in force until amended by the Legislative Council to be hereafter convened under and by virtue of the laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

That this court compel the Respondent to dispatch an Envoy Plenipotentiary to Honolulu, Island of O`ahu, to establish dialogue with the Petitioner and to assist in the ongoing transition and reinstatement of the constitutional Government in accordance with "established" laws of the Hawaiian Kingdom and in compliance with the treaties that exist between the two nations.

Furthermore, that this court, pursuant to Article VIII, Treaty of 1850, U.S. Statutes at Large, 43d Congress, 1873-1875, p. 408, states in part, to wit: "...and each of the two contracting parties engages that the citizens or subjects of the other residing in their respective States shall enjoy their property and personal security in as full and ample manner as their own citizens or subjects, or the subjects or citizens of the most favored nation, but subject always to the laws and statutes of the two countries, respectively," issue an alternative writ of prohibition upon all Legislative, Executive and Judicial proceedings of the United States of America within the territorial jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Kingdom, which includes the State of Hawai`i and all of its municipal corporations, until the terms of transition and reinstatement of the constitutional Government, aforementioned, have been negotiated and agreed upon.

That this Petitioner, being otherwise remediless, is entitled to a writ of mandamus, requiring and compelling said Respondent to comply with his statutory duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," as mandated under Article II, (section)3 of the United States Constitution.

That this court grant such other and further relief as is just and equitable.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai`i, November 17, 1997.

[signed] DAVID KEANU SAI
Ambassador of the Hawaiian Kingdom, in Pro Se