New Zealand is pioneering a different approach to artificial intelligence governance, one that places indigenous rights and constitutional obligations at the center rather than treating them as afterthoughts. The Human Rights Commission released a comprehensive report on Friday arguing that Māori data sovereignty and Te Tiriti o Waitangi, New Zealand's founding treaty, must guide how AI systems are developed and deployed across the country.

What Makes New Zealand's Approach to AI Different?

Rather than focusing solely on innovation speed or competitive advantage, the commission's report emphasizes that artificial intelligence must respect human rights and constitutional principles. The framework recognizes that Māori, like all peoples, have the right to determine how data relating to their communities, interests, and identities is collected, used, governed, and protected.

Sophie Bradwell-Pollack, a senior human rights advisor, explained that the stakes extend far beyond individual privacy. She noted that Māori data encompasses more than basic personal information; it includes language, culture, and knowledge systems that are central to indigenous sovereignty. "It's not just ownership of basic facts about a person," Bradwell-Pollack stated. "It includes taonga, language, culture, and so the wider implications of that and the impact on Māori sovereignty, te ao Māori, tikanga, and all of that are a lot wider than just the kind of general kind of the smaller lens of that data is just not being used or being used in a proper way".

She

"Māori, like all peoples, have the right to determine how data relating to their communities, interests and identities is collected, used, governed and protected. As AI systems increasingly draw on language, knowledge and data, it is critical that Māori rights, interests and authority are respected," said Dayle Takitimu, Indigenous Rights governance partner at Rongomau Taketake.

Dayle Takitimu, Indigenous Rights Governance Partner at Rongomau Taketake

What Are the Key Risks AI Poses to Indigenous Communities?

The commission identified several significant risks that disproportionately affect Māori communities. Large language models, which power many modern AI systems, rely on enormous amounts of training data. However, that data often does not represent all communities equally, creating blind spots in AI systems.

The risks identified in the report include:

• Representation Gaps: AI systems trained on data that underrepresents Māori communities may simply fail to consider or account for their needs and perspectives.
• Bias Perpetuation: AI systems can reproduce and amplify biases that already exist within society, potentially automating discrimination at scale.
• Data Misuse: Privacy breaches and unauthorized use of Māori data, including cultural knowledge and language, without consent or benefit to communities.
• Lack of Transparency: Government and private sector AI systems that make decisions affecting people without clear explanation of how those systems work or what data they use.
• Digital Exclusion: Communities left behind as AI systems become integrated into essential services like healthcare and education.
• Job Displacement: Economic disruption from AI automation without adequate support for affected workers.

Bradwell-Pollack emphasized that some of these risks stem from the fundamental design of AI systems. "Some of the risks are that they're just not there, and not being considered and represented," she explained. "The other is also that that perpetuates biases that are already in our system, so there is a real risk there".

How Can Governments Implement a Human Rights-Based Approach to AI?

The commission's report does not prescribe a single technology or model. Instead, it provides a framework that governments and organizations can adapt to their own contexts. The approach centers on transparency, participation, and accountability.

Key implementation steps include:

• Transparency Requirements: When government agencies use AI to make decisions about people, they must clearly explain how those systems work, what data they use, and what factors influence their outputs.
• Accountability Mechanisms: People affected by AI systems need to know where responsibility sits and how they can seek remedy if something goes wrong.
• Meaningful Engagement: From a Te Tiriti perspective, this means genuine partnership with Māori, not checkbox exercises; ensuring Māori understand how their data is being used and supporting iwi and hapū to exercise their right to self-determination.
• Data Governance: Establishing clear rules about how Māori data is collected, stored, and used, with Māori communities having meaningful control over these processes.

Bradwell-Pollack stressed that human rights obligations do not disappear when technology is introduced. "Human rights and Te Tiriti obligations apply," she said. "They apply whether you're writing on paper or whether you're using a computer".

The government is actively expanding AI use across the public service as a way to improve productivity. However, the commission argues that efficiency gains cannot come at the cost of human rights. "Innovation and efficiency is only really a small part of what needs to be considered," Bradwell-Pollack noted.

What Opportunities Does AI Present for Indigenous Communities?

The report is not anti-technology. Instead, it recognizes that AI systems can bring significant benefits when designed and governed responsibly. These benefits include improving access to healthcare and education, supporting people with disabilities, and helping revitalize te reo Māori and indigenous knowledge systems.

However, Bradwell-Pollack emphasized that these benefits will not happen automatically. "These technologies exist," she said. "They are being used and, actually, there are just some things that we need to do to ensure that they're being used in a way that doesn't do harm. It's not that this is inevitable. We actually have a voice and we should be using that".

The commission noted that Aotearoa is in a strong position to learn from approaches being developed overseas while building on indigenous rights and Māori data sovereignty. Internationally, Māori are already recognized as leaders in indigenous rights and AI governance, creating an opportunity for New Zealand to set an example for the rest of the world.

What Happens Next?

The government has primary responsibility for respecting, protecting, and fulfilling human rights and for giving effect to Te Tiriti through law, policy, investment, and public service delivery. A spokesperson for Paul Goldsmith, the minister responsible for the public service and digitizing government, said Goldsmith had received the report and "will consider its recommendations in due course." The government will table its response in parliament.

The commission is also engaging with political parties as they develop their AI policies before the election. Bradwell-Pollack stressed that implementing a human rights and Te Tiriti-based approach to AI will require action from multiple stakeholders. "It's not one thing. It is a multi-faceted approach that will take the government, that will take us, that will take iwi and hapū, that will take the public and business to all get on board to do".

While much AI technology is developed overseas and imported by businesses, New Zealand cannot necessarily control how the technology itself is built. However, the country can decide how that technology is used and governed domestically. This distinction is crucial for a Te Tiriti-based approach, which emphasizes meaningful engagement, partnership, and ensuring Māori understand how their data is being used.