January 30, 2026

Professor Paul Moon Calls for Clarity on Treaty’s So-Called “Fourth Article”

Dale Husband Posted On January 30, 2026

Dale Husband Professor Paul Moon Calls for Clarity on Treaty’s So-Called “Fourth Article”

Leading historian and Treaty scholar Professor Paul Moon is calling on the Waitangi Tribunal to clearly and publicly state its position on the so-called “Fourth Article” of the Treaty of Waitangi, arguing that it has no historical or legal foundation in the original Treaty texts.

Professor Moon says the continued reference to a Fourth Article – often cited as guaranteeing freedom of religion and belief – has persisted in public discourse despite not appearing in either the English or Te Reo Māori versions signed in 1840.

He believes the idea has endured largely because it has been repeated over time without sufficient challenge, gradually taking on the appearance of legitimacy.

“When ideas are repeated often enough, they can become accepted as fact,” Moon says. “But repetition doesn’t make something historically true.”

The so-called Fourth Article is commonly linked to oral assurances given by missionaries during Treaty discussions, particularly around religious freedom. While Moon acknowledges the historical context of those assurances, he says conflating them with the Treaty itself creates confusion about what the Treaty actually contains.

Moon warns that when government agencies and public bodies rely on the Fourth Article in policy statements or official communications, it risks undermining both legal clarity and public understanding.

“If agencies base decisions on something that isn’t actually part of the Treaty, it weakens confidence in how the Treaty is interpreted and applied,” he says.

He argues that such misunderstandings can also fuel misinformation and polarised debate, particularly at a time when Te Tiriti is under intense public scrutiny.

Professor Moon says it is crucial for the Waitangi Tribunal to explicitly clarify its stance on the Fourth Article, noting that ongoing silence leaves room for uncertainty and inconsistent interpretation.

“The Tribunal plays a key role in shaping Treaty understanding,” he says. “If it doesn’t clearly address this issue, the ambiguity will continue.”

He believes reaffirming the authority of the original Treaty texts – both the English and Te Reo Māori versions – is essential to protecting the integrity and historical accuracy of Te Tiriti.

Moon says grounding Treaty interpretation in the documents actually signed helps ensure debates are informed by evidence rather than assumption, and strengthens the credibility of Treaty scholarship and policy alike.

“This isn’t about diminishing the Treaty,” he says. “It’s about respecting it enough to be precise about what it does – and does not – say.”

As conversations about Te Tiriti continue to shape law, policy, and public life in Aotearoa, Professor Moon’s call highlights the importance of historical accuracy, clarity, and careful stewardship of the country’s founding document.