A/HRC/18/35/Add.4 paras. 52-56 below. However, some have expressed that making the Waitangi Tribunal’s reports legally binding would significantly change the nature of the Tribunal’s work and may prompt the Government to restrict its mandate. Also, given the complexity and difficulty of Treaty settlement, some have argued that it is preferable that Maori leaders themselves make judgments about settlements and these decisions should not be imposed by the Tribunal. 28. In any case, the Special Rapporteur observes that the Government’s adherence with the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal should be part of its obligations to cooperate in good faith with the Maori and is an important confidence-building gesture. Further, if the Government chooses not to follow the Tribunal’s recommendations in a specific situation, it should provide a justification for this decision and still act in accordance with Treaty principles and international human rights standards. 29. Despite these issues, overall, the Waitangi Tribunal has provided enormous benefits for all of New Zealand by helping to provide redress for Maori grievances. The Waitangi Tribunal has facilitated significant reparations for Maori grievances in relation to both current and historical breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. The reports themselves represent an impressive documentation of the history of breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi and offer an important analysis of the path forward for redress and reconciliation. Finally, the role of the Waitangi Tribunal in providing a forum for Maori to present their issues in detail to the Government and to receive a response plays an important role in the reconciliation between Maori, the wider New Zealand society, and the State. 30. Given that the cut-off date for the submission of Maori historical claims expired on 1 September 2008, the future role of the Waitangi Tribunal is uncertain. It is unclear whether, after working through its current caseload, the Waitangi Tribunal will concentrate only on modern grievances, or whether its role will evolve to address other issues connected with Treaty of Waitangi. 2. Negotiated Treaty settlement with the Crown 31. Proceedings before the Waitangi Tribunal and a decision validating a claim typically are precursors to settlement negotiations with the Government. Although Maori groups may choose to enter into settlement negotiations at any time after a claim is registered with the Waitangi Tribunal, the process generally starts after the Tribunal issues its report in the case. Participation in negotiations is voluntary and all groups are free to withdraw at any time. (a) Positive developments 32. Since the Treaty settlement process was developed in the 1990s, numerous Maori groups have negotiated settlements to their historical grievances with the Government. As of July 2010, the Government has reached a full or partial Treaty settlement with 27 iwi, and 35 iwi have yet to reach a settlement, although most of these are currently engaged in pre-negotiations or intensive negotiations with the Government.15 To date, over NZ$1 billion has been committed to final and comprehensive settlements and several partial settlements.16 Treaty settlements cover 61 per cent of the total land area of New Zealand. The Crown assists claimant groups by providing funds for all stages of settlement negotiations in addition to whatever financial redress settlement is ultimately agreed upon. 15 16 10 New Zealand, Office of Treaty Settlements, “Background report” (note 8 above), p. 10. New Zealand, Office of Treaty Settlements, “Four Monthly Report: November 2009-February 2010”, p. 4.