High Court forces Te Pāti Māori to re-admit MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi after expulsion

Friday, 5 December 2025

MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi’s reinstatement to Te Pāti Māori ‒ at least on an interim basis after a successful legal challenge ‒ is a relief she says, after a “deeply challenging” time during the party’s internal turmoil.

She sought an injunction at the High Court in Wellington on Thursday ahead of the party’s annual general meeting this weekend. A substantive hearing will be heard on February 2.

Kapa-Kingi was expelled from Te Pāti Māori (TPM) last month, alongside fellow MP Tākuta Ferris.

News of her reinstatement brought “a sense of relief and reassurance after a long period of uncertainty”, she said.

“The past few months have been deeply challenging for me, my whānau, and our people of Te Tai Tokerau. This has been an incredibly taumaha journey.

“From the beginning, my hope was to resolve this through tikanga, kōrero and houhou te rongo. Court was never the path I wanted to take, and it was only chosen when all other options had been exhausted.”

.

Kapa-Kingi and Ferris’ expulsion came after a period of chaotic infighting, including an unsigned email sent to all members alleging that Kapa-Kingi was overspending her parliamentary budget by $133,000.

Ferris, after publicly criticising non-Māori Labour supporters campaigning for candidate Peeni Henare to win the Māori electorate seat, said there “wasn’t a consensus” about issuing this explosive email.

His Te Tai Tonga electorate executive publicised a petition that called for Tamihere to “stand down immediately”.

Kapa-Kingi was then demoted from party whip.

The allegation of overspending or misspending her parliamentary budget by $133,000 appeared to be TPM’s principle grounds for expelling Kapa-Kingi, according to her lawyer Mike Colson KC.

He argued the party’s National Council did not have the power to expel her, it had not even met properly, and that the allegation that Kapa-Kingi had misspent party funds was wrong.

He also argued that TPM president John Tamihere was no longer lawfully the party president as he was elected to a three-year term in June of 2022 that had now expired.

Danny Salmon KC, lawyer for Tamihere, said the expulsion was lawful under broad powers the party had to expel members who bring the party into disrepute, and that the courts should tread carefully before interfering in politics.

Salmon noted that the party’s 2024 AGM had seen Tamihere’s presidency affirmed - with Kapa-Kingi present.

Friday’s ruling

In his decision, Justice Paul Radich said there were “serious questions to be tried” on the manner in which Kapa-Kingi was expelled.

“I have found that the need to protect her position pending a substantive decision on the issues outweighs the difficulties the respondents perceive as arising if an order is made requiring her return.”

He pointed to practical considerations, including access to TPM’s database, which Kapa-Kingi and her staff would not be able to access while excluded.

“Equally, the second applicant’s email address [the Te Tai Tokerau electorate council] has been cancelled by [the party]. That causes all sorts of issues for representation of the electorate.“

Kapa-Kingi would also not be able to attend the AGM or other hui if she was not a member of the party, Justice Radich said.

“While the respondents have, in the assurances they have given, said that Ms Kapa-Kingi is welcome to attend the ‘protocol’ session prior to the formal AGM – and that this is where the real discussion and pātai take place – that is a poor substitute for the full participation that would be open to her were she a member.”

He did not make the other interim orders that were sought, including restraining Tamihere from acting in his role as TPM president.

Justice Radich said while the re-election issue required further consideration, he did not see it as necessary to preserve Kapa-Kingi’s position.

The concern over Tamihere chairing the AGM was addressed through the assurance given that TPM vice president, Fallyn Flavell, would chair it instead, he said.

“Beyond that, I cannot see that any orders, even with adjusted wording, could have a bearing on Ms Kapa-Kingi’s substantive rights or her standing within Te Pāti.”

Interim orders restraining Tamihere would cause “unnecessary instability and unnecessary harm” rather than preserving her position.

“In circumstances in which Mr Tamihere’s affirmation in 2024 proceeded without opposition, and in which there would be little to be gained for anyone in restraining Mr Tamihere at this interim stage, I cannot see a basis for an interim order under this head.

“The issue does need to be considered substantively, but interim holding measures do not need to be put in place.”