In 2022, the Human Rights Commission Housing Inquiry will consider, with the National Iwi Chairs Forum and other partners, whether this understanding of accountability as monitoring, review, and remedial action is consistent with Te Ao Māori. If this is not consistent with Te Ao Māori, what is a more appropriate way to understand accountability for Aotearoa? Until those discussions have taken place, it is premature to apply accountability, understood as monitoring, review, and remedial action, to tino rangatiratanga (Article 2, Te Tiriti o Waitangi). Therefore for present purposes, we confine our consideration of accountability and the right to a decent home to the kāwanatanga sphere (Article 1, Te Tiriti o Waitangi). Constructive accountability and housing in Aotearoa The housing system is highly complex and populated by many actors with a variety of mandates, purposes, and agendas. Similarly, there are a range of institutions with responsibility for aspects of the housing system. Here we focus on some existing formal (or statutory) accountability arrangements in the context of the right to a decent home. Of course, there are also some extremely important informal forms of accountability, such as the media and civil society organisations. However, in this report our focus is on formal accountability. Waitangi Tribunal The Waitangi Tribunal issues non-binding recommendations to the Crown based on claims brought by Māori. The claims may relate to legislation, policies, and acts or omissions of the Crown that allegedly breach the promises affirmed in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. For example, a kaupapa inquiry is currently underway that will hear claims and grievances brought on behalf of many whānau, marae, iwi and hapū across Aotearoa concerning housing policy and services.18 The Tribunal has not yet given sustained attention to the right to a decent home, and this kaupapa inquiry is a promising opportunity for the Tribunal to consider the relationship between Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the right to a decent home. The Tribunal provides a vehicle for Māori to voice concerns about Crown actions relating to Māori issues. However, the Crown does not have a statutory obligation to adopt the recommendations made by the Waitangi Tribunal. In short, the third element of accountability (remedial action) is weak. Judicial New Zealand courts have rarely discussed the right to a decent home or other housing-related rights, mainly because the right to a decent home has not been placed in national law, such as the Bill of Rights Act 1990. The right to a decent home attracted discussion in the 1990s case Lawson v Housing New Zealand, but without shedding significant light on what the court interprets the right to mean.19 The plaintiff referred to international law: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention of the Rights of the Child. These all refer to the right to adequate housing and create international obligations for New Zealand, but have not been specifically incorporated into New Zealand domestic law. The Court held that the Ministers of Housing and Finance were required to ensure international covenants “inform the decision-making process”. 13