Last reviewed · SEPTEMBER 6, 2026

Organization profile

Hawaiian Kingdom — Acting Council of Regency

Every organization on this site uses this same profile template, with the same sections in the same order. No organization receives an additional or promotional section. Where the reviewed records establish nothing on a point, the section says so. Profiles are evaluated using the same editorial standards and evidentiary categories. The amount of detail presented may vary according to the quantity, accessibility, and provenance of documentation available for each organization.

Evidence balance

This is a description of the source mix on this page, not a credibility score and not a ranking. A page can be heavily class A and still describe a contested claim, and a page can be heavily class C simply because the organization is the only party that has published about itself.

Class A5
Class B0
Class C15
Class D3
Class E5
Archive analysis / methodology2

30 citations on this page.

A — Primary government, court, institutional, or authenticated documentary record: A record created by a government, a court, an institution, or the parties to an instrument, held by that body or an archive, or a document whose authenticity has been established.
B — Independent journalism or reputable third-party reporting: Reporting, scholarship, or third-party documentation produced independently of the organization.
C — Organization-produced documentation: Material produced or published by the organization itself. Class C is not treated as false: it establishes what the organization documented or asserted. Broader claims that depend on outside acceptance — recognition, another party's status, or an outcome — require corroboration from class A or B.
D — Claim with limited or incomplete independent corroboration: A reference was located, but independent corroboration is partial or has not been confirmed against a primary source.
E — No reliable source located: No reliable source was located for the statement.
ARCHIVE ANALYSIS / METHODOLOGY — Not an external evidence source: This site's own source review, editorial policy, methodology statement, archive assessment, or a conclusion derived from the material above. It is not an external evidence source and is deliberately kept outside classes A through E.

Classes A through E are applied to every organization on this site, by the same rule, with no organization held to a stricter or looser standard than another. The archive's own source review, editorial policy, methodology, and assessments are labelled ARCHIVE ANALYSIS / METHODOLOGY and are never counted as class A through E evidence. Class C — organization-produced documentation — is not treated as false; it establishes what the organization documented or asserted, and may require outside corroboration before a broader claim rests on it.

Evidence status labels

Each section below carries one of these six statuses, derived the same way for every organization on this site. A status describes how a section’s sources stand together. It is not a score and not a ranking. Absence of documentation is not automatically evidence that an event did not occur.

Strongly corroborated: Multiple meaningful independent primary or institutional sources establish the proposition.
Corroborated: At least one meaningful independent, counterparty, court, government, institutional, or reputable third-party source establishes the core proposition.
Partially corroborated: Some outside evidence supports part of the proposition, but the broader or full claim is not independently established.
Organization documentation: The proposition is primarily supported by documentation produced or published by the organization itself.
Oral / traditional testimony: Evidence derives primarily from firsthand, oral, genealogical, or traditional accounts. Recorded on its own terms and not treated as lesser, while being kept distinct from independently verified documentary records.
No documentation located: The review has not located adequate supporting evidence for the proposition. Absence of documentation is not automatically evidence that an event did not occur.

Self-described name and status

Organization documentation

Describes itself as the acting government of the continuing Hawaiian Kingdom, organized as an Acting Council of Regency.

Class COrganization-published materials (self-published).Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-published materials (self-published).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Founded

Organization documentation

The organization dates its formation as an acting government to 1996.

Class COrganization published materials.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No independent registration record confirming the date was located.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization published materials.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No independent registration record confirming the date was located.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Leadership or governing body

Organization documentation

Identifies Dr. Keanu Sai among named officers of the Acting Council of Regency; no independent appointment record was located.

Class COrganization-published materials (self-published).Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-published materials (self-published).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Political model

Organization documentation

The organization states that the Hawaiian Kingdom continues as a state under international law and that it acts on its behalf pending an end to what it describes as occupation.

Class COrganization publications.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. U.S. and state courts have rejected continuity arguments raised as a defense; see State v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994).

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization publications.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. U.S. and state courts have rejected continuity arguments raised as a defense; see State v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994).
No direct document link recorded for this source.

The organization describes an Acting Council of Regency with named officers.

Class COrganization publications.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No independent record of appointment or election was located.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization publications.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No independent record of appointment or election was located.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Stated mission

Organization documentation

States the objective of ending what it describes as a prolonged occupation and restoring Kingdom governance.

Class COrganization-published materials (self-published).Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-published materials (self-published).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Claimed constituency

No documentation located

No enrollment or citizenship register was located in the records reviewed.

Class ENo source located in the records reviewed.None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Absence from the records reviewed is not evidence that no such record exists. This site's review is limited to publicly reachable sources.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
No source located in the records reviewed.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class E
None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Absence from the records reviewed is not evidence that no such record exists. This site's review is limited to publicly reachable sources.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Claimed territory

Organization documentation

The organization's claim covers the territory of the former Hawaiian Kingdom.

Class COrganization publications.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. The territory is administered by the United States and the State of Hawaiʻi.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization publications.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. The territory is administered by the United States and the State of Hawaiʻi.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Governing documents

Partially corroborated

The organization relies on the 1864 Hawaiian Kingdom constitution rather than a new governing document.

Class DSecondary references only: 1864 Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom; no archival scan or authoritative reproduction was located in this review.Single independent source. Accessed September 6, 2026. The archival text is independently held; its present-day operative effect is contested.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Secondary references only: 1864 Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom; no archival scan or authoritative reproduction was located in this review.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class D
Single independent source. Accessed September 6, 2026. The archival text is independently held; its present-day operative effect is contested.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Current documented activities

Organization documentation

The organization continues to publish and to make filings and presentations.

Class COrganization publications and its principal's own court filings; no independent scholarly source was identified in this review.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Activity is concentrated in one principal figure.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization publications and its principal's own court filings; no independent scholarly source was identified in this review.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Activity is concentrated in one principal figure.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Community service & cultural work

Organization documentation

Organization-published records describe public lectures, civic education presentations, and commemorative observances relating to Kingdom history.

Class COrganization-published notices and recordings (self-published).Self-published. Attendance and continuity were not independently confirmed.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-published notices and recordings (self-published).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Self-published. Attendance and continuity were not independently confirmed.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

This category records documented community service and cultural work on its own terms. It is not scored, weighted, or compared between organizations. Where the entry reads “no documentation located,” no record was found in this review; that is not evidence that the activity never occurred.

Domestic legal record

Corroborated

Continuity arguments associated with the organization have been raised in Hawaiʻi courts and rejected.

Class AState v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994) and later Hawaiʻi decisions.Independently corroborated. Accessed September 6, 2026. Courts have addressed the arguments as defenses, not as a comprehensive ruling on all continuity questions.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
State v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994) and later Hawaiʻi decisions.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class A
Independently corroborated. Accessed September 6, 2026. Courts have addressed the arguments as defenses, not as a comprehensive ruling on all continuity questions.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom (Permanent Court of Arbitration, 1999–2001). The tribunal did not reach the continuity question and noted the absence of a second state party.

Class DSecondary references only: Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, PCA Case No. 1999-01; the official PCA case page was not retrievable in this review (HTTP 403) and the award text was read in a third-party reproduction.An arbitration between a private party and an asserted government is not a determination of statehood.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Secondary references only: Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, PCA Case No. 1999-01; the official PCA case page was not retrievable in this review (HTTP 403) and the award text was read in a third-party reproduction.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class D
An arbitration between a private party and an asserted government is not a determination of statehood.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

External engagements

Partially corroborated

Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom was docketed and heard as an arbitration at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (1999–2001).

Class DSecondary references only: Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, PCA Case No. 1999-01; the official PCA case page was not retrievable in this review (HTTP 403) and the award text was read in a third-party reproduction.Single independent source. Accessed September 6, 2026. The tribunal did not decide the continuity question and noted the absence of a second state party. Use of the PCA's facilities is not recognition of statehood by any state.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Secondary references only: Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, PCA Case No. 1999-01; the official PCA case page was not retrievable in this review (HTTP 403) and the award text was read in a third-party reproduction.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class D
Single independent source. Accessed September 6, 2026. The tribunal did not decide the continuity question and noted the absence of a second state party. Use of the PCA's facilities is not recognition of statehood by any state.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

The organization publishes communications it states were sent to United Nations bodies.

Class COrganization-produced copies.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No UN registration or response was located.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-produced copies.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No UN registration or response was located.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Formal state / diplomatic recognition

No documentation located

No formal act of recognition by a UN member state was located in the records reviewed.

Class ENo instrument or official state record located.None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Recognition would be evidenced by the recognizing state's own instrument. Correspondence, meetings, and agreements with nongovernmental or Indigenous bodies do not substitute for it.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
No instrument or official state record located.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class E
None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Recognition would be evidenced by the recognizing state's own instrument. Correspondence, meetings, and agreements with nongovernmental or Indigenous bodies do not substitute for it.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Indigenous / traditional / royal relationships

Organization documentation

The organization publishes accounts of engagement with Native Hawaiian and other Indigenous audiences through lectures, community presentations, and scholarship; no agreement with a traditional authority or royal family was located.

Class COrganization-produced accounts; scholarly publications by its principal.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Community and academic engagement is recorded on its own terms and is not an act of recognition by any state.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-produced accounts; scholarly publications by its principal.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Community and academic engagement is recorded on its own terms and is not an act of recognition by any state.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Traditional and Indigenous recognition can have substantial cultural, genealogical, political, and community significance. The archive documents it on its own terms while distinguishing it from formal diplomatic recognition by a UN member state.

Organization-produced evidence

Organization documentation

Governance structure and UN correspondence are organization-produced.

Class C14 organization-produced sources (class C) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.Class C establishes what the organization documented or asserted; it does not establish that an outside party accepted it.
Archive analysis / methodologyThis site's own source review.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Organization-produced material is evidence of assertion, not of external acceptance.

Source / Evidence(2)

Compiled or secondary
14 organization-produced sources (class C) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Class C establishes what the organization documented or asserted; it does not establish that an outside party accepted it.
No direct document link recorded for this source.
Compiled or secondary
This site's own source review.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class M
Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Organization-produced material is evidence of assertion, not of external acceptance.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Independent corroboration

Corroborated

The arbitration record and the court decisions are independent; the governance claims are not.

Class A4 primary government, court, institutional, or authenticated records (class A) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.
Archive analysis / methodologyThis site's own source review.Independently corroborated. Accessed September 6, 2026. Independent corroboration covers procedure, not the underlying legal claim.

Source / Evidence(2)

Compiled or secondary
4 primary government, court, institutional, or authenticated records (class A) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class A
No direct document link recorded for this source.
Compiled or secondary
This site's own source review.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class M
Independently corroborated. Accessed September 6, 2026. Independent corroboration covers procedure, not the underlying legal claim.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Disputed or unresolved claims

Corroborated

Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom was heard at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (1999–2001). Use of the PCA's facilities is not recognition of statehood; the tribunal did not decide the continuity question and noted the absence of a second state party.

Class APermanent Court of Arbitration case record, Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom.The PCA administers arbitrations between varied parties; administration is not a determination of statehood.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Permanent Court of Arbitration case record, Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class A
The PCA administers arbitrations between varied parties; administration is not a determination of statehood.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Communications the organization states it sent to United Nations bodies are published by the organization. Communication with the UN is not recognition by the UN.

Class COrganization-published copies (self-published).No UN registration or response located.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization-published copies (self-published).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
No UN registration or response located.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

U.S. / state characterization

Corroborated

Hawaiʻi courts have rejected continuity arguments associated with the organization when raised as a defense, and treat it as a private association.

Class AState v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994)The court rejected a Kingdom-continuity defense because the defendant did not establish his factual premise. Commentators dispute how far the holding reaches.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
State v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994)
Independent corroboration
Evidence class A
The court rejected a Kingdom-continuity defense because the defendant did not establish his factual premise. Commentators dispute how far the holding reaches.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Sovereignty-continuity interpretation

Organization documentation

The organization's own argument is that the Kingdom continues as a state under international law and that its acts are those of an acting government during occupation. This is a legal argument advanced in scholarship and filings; it has not been accepted by any court or state.

Class COrganization principal's own publications and court filings; no independent scholarly review of them was identified in this review.Publication is not adjudication; the argument remains contested.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization principal's own publications and court filings; no independent scholarly review of them was identified in this review.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
Publication is not adjudication; the argument remains contested.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Leadership & institutional accountability

Corroborated

Acting Council of Regency with named officers, as described by the organization.

Class COrganization publications.No independent appointment record was located.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Organization publications.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class C
No independent appointment record was located.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Financial transparency: no audited financial statements or public financial filings were located. Absence of filings may reflect the organization's form rather than any irregularity.

Class ENo source located.Requires source review.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
No source located.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class E
Requires source review.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Leadership & institutional accountability — Dr. Keanu Sai [High relevance] (Felony conviction): Convicted in 1999 of attempted first-degree theft in connection with Perfect Title Company; sentenced to five years' probation in 2000. Arrest, charge, dismissal, acquittal, conviction, civil judgment, administrative finding, and allegation are distinct; an arrest or charge alone establishes no guilt.

Class AHawaiʻi state court records and contemporaneous news coverage (outcome recorded; no docket number, opinion citation, or specific article located in this review).The conviction concerns title-company conduct and is separate from his later scholarly and arbitration work.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Hawaiʻi state court records and contemporaneous news coverage (outcome recorded; no docket number, opinion citation, or specific article located in this review).
Independent corroboration
Evidence class A
The conviction concerns title-company conduct and is separate from his later scholarly and arbitration work.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Leadership conduct may affect institutional trust and accountability. It does not determine whether the historical Hawaiian Kingdom existed or resolve the legal question of state continuity, and it does not determine whether a people possesses a right to self-determination.

Class EEditorial policy of this site.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Editorial policy of this site.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class E
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Organization response

No documentation located

No written response or additional primary material from Hawaiian Kingdom — Acting Council of Regency has been published on this profile as of September 6, 2026. No record of outreach to the organization by this archive has been documented, so nothing here should be read as a failure or refusal to respond. Organizations may submit additional primary materials or a written response through the archive's correction and response process, and it is published alongside this profile without editing for position.

Class EEditorial policy of this site.This is a statement of process, not a finding about the organization.

Source / Evidence(1)

Compiled or secondary
Editorial policy of this site.
Independent corroboration
Evidence class E
This is a statement of process, not a finding about the organization.
No direct document link recorded for this source.

Evidence summary

Dr. David Keanu Sai's academic framework on Hawaiian Kingdom continuity is real and has been published in peer-reviewed international-law journals. In Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom (1999–2001) the Permanent Court of Arbitration administered the arbitration and the Hawaiian Kingdom appeared as a named party; the case was dismissed on procedural grounds without a sovereignty ruling, and the PCA's administration was not recognition of Hawaiian statehood by the PCA, the United Nations, the Netherlands, or the international community. However, Sai was convicted of first-degree attempted theft in 1999 in connection with the Perfect Title Company, which charged fees to challenge land-title validity. Local press in 2017 reported a dispute over an OHA research contract of roughly $70,000; the original report is no longer online, Sai publicly disputed its characterization, and no adjudicated finding on that contract has been located, so the matter is recorded as a reported and contested dispute rather than an established fact.

Archive Assessment

Two separate things are on the record and neither settles the other. The international-law scholarship is published and peer-reviewed, and the PCA proceeding is documented. The 1999 conviction is a court record, and the 2017 OHA contract dispute is a press report that Sai disputed and that no located ruling has resolved. Readers should assess the legal arguments on the sources cited for them, and the leadership record on the sources cited for it.

Sources for this summary

Detailed Legal Record and Organization-Supplied Documentation

The materials below are retained for archival and research purposes. Inclusion does not constitute independent verification of every claim contained in the source material. Where possible, the Hawaiʻi Sovereignty Archive distinguishes court records, government records, contemporaneous third-party reporting, and materials supplied or compiled by the organization itself.

This subsection sits outside the comparative profile above. It is not a ranking, a score, or a measure of any organization’s standing, and the number of entries reflects only how much documentation this review has located and cited.

Editorial rule — adverse and misconduct-related records

Adverse or misconduct-related material is classified by what the record actually establishes. A fact established by a primary record or a reliable independent source is stated plainly and is not softened because it may harm a reputation. An allegation is not described as proven misconduct. Conduct is not called fraud, theft, corruption, or a scam unless a court or other competent authority made that finding, or the term appears in a source and is attributed to that source. Audit findings are described as audit findings; findings reported by a news outlet are attributed to that outlet. A criminal charge is never described as a conviction; a dismissed case states the dismissal; a conviction states the offense and disposition where known; and where later proceedings changed a case's status, that later procedural history is included. Euphemism is avoided: where a source establishes something specific, the specific statement is used rather than a vaguer one.

Alleged: An allegation, a criminal charge, a civil complaint, or an accusation made by another organization. Unproven; no competent authority has made a finding on it.
Reported: Reported by a news outlet or other third party and attributed to that source. Reporting is not an official finding.
Audited: An audit finding or an administrative finding, described in the terms the audit or agency used. An audit finding is not a court judgment.
Adjudicated: A court, tribunal, or appellate body entered a decision, judgment, plea disposition, or settlement in the matter. The specific disposition is stated.
Convicted: A criminal conviction was entered. The offense and disposition are stated where the located records establish them.
Dismissed: The matter, or the counts identified, were dismissed. A dismissal is stated as a dismissal and is not reported as an unresolved accusation.
Unresolved: No disposition, finding, or outcome has been located. Absence of a located outcome is not evidence either way.

Primary record completeness

Primary record completeness is a separate field from the evidence-status label. The label states what the located record establishes; this field states how complete that documentation is. A missing locator is never treated as doubt about an otherwise documented outcome, and an incomplete record is never read against the subject.

Complete: The primary record is located, cited to a specific document, and reachable by a reader.
Partial: Part of the primary record is located and cited; identified elements of it are not.
Secondary-only: The statement rests on reporting or another secondary account. No primary record has been obtained.
Primary locator missing: The outcome itself is documented, but no item-level citation or online locator for the primary file has been obtained. This is a citation gap, not doubt about the outcome.
Further verification required: A named record must be requested or a later filing checked before the entry can be stated more fully.

Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom — Permanent Court of Arbitration

Evidence statusAdjudicated

1999–2001 · PCA Case No. 1999-01

Sai represented the Hawaiian Kingdom as its agent. The PCA administered the arbitration and "Hawaiian Kingdom" appeared as a named party. That administrative fact did not itself constitute diplomatic recognition of Hawaiian statehood by the PCA, the United Nations, the Netherlands, or the international community; it remains a significant procedural milestone, and administration and participation are distinct from formal recognition. The case was dismissed for absence of an indispensable third party (the United States) without ruling on Hawaiian sovereignty.

Contemporaneous third-party reporting

PCA case file

State v. Sai — Perfect Title prosecution

Evidence statusConvicted

1997–2000 · Honolulu Circuit Court, Crim. No. 97-2160

Arrested 1997 for theft, racketeering, and money laundering. Convicted by jury December 1999 of first-degree attempted theft. Sentenced April 2000 to 5 years probation. Primary case file locator not yet available online. The outcome itself is documented; the absence of an online locator is a citation gap, not doubt about the verdict or the sentence.

Primary record completeness — Primary locator missing

Highest source class located: Hawaiʻi Judiciary case record for Cir. Ct. 1st Cir. Crim. No. 97-2160, reachable through the eCourt Kokua public case search, with contemporaneous reporting (Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Dec. 1999; Honolulu Advertiser, Apr. 2000).
Exact missing record: An item-level citation to the jury verdict and to the April 2000 judgment and sentence. No published opinion exists, and eCourt Kokua is a search interface rather than a citable document.
What that record would clarify: The precise count of conviction and the exact terms of the sentence, for pinpoint citation.
Current wording: Safe as written. The jury verdict and the probation sentence are documented and stated plainly; only the pinpoint locator is missing.
Next verification step: Request certified copies of the verdict and of the judgment and sentence from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, Honolulu (Legal Documents Branch).

2017 reporting on an Office of Hawaiian Affairs research contract

Evidence statusReported

March 2017 · reported and contested; no adjudicated finding located

Local television reporting in 2017 described payments of roughly $70,000 from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs for research and consulting and characterized a report as undelivered. Dr. Sai publicly disputed that characterization in a recorded response. The original report is no longer online and no archived copy has been located. No OHA contract, payment record, internal memorandum, audit, ethics determination, or court finding on the performance of that contract has been obtained. This entry records reported and contested material only; nothing in it establishes that work was undelivered or that any payment was improper.

Primary record completeness — Secondary-only

Highest source class located: Big Island Video News (Feb. 20, 2017), carrying Sai’s recorded response and describing the underlying Hawaii News Now report.
Exact missing record: The OHA contract and any amendments, the payment or disbursement records, any OHA internal memorandum or audit on deliverables, any ethics or adjudicated finding, and an archived copy of the original March 2017 broadcast report.
What that record would clarify: What was contracted, what was paid, what was delivered, and whether any body ever made a finding on it.
Current wording: Safe only in its current qualified form. The entry must remain Reported and contested and may not be restated as independently established.
Next verification step: File a Hawaiʻi Uniform Information Practices Act request with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs for the contract and payment records, and search the Internet Archive and news-archive services for the original March 2017 report.

Contemporaneous third-party reporting

Big Island Video News (Feb. 20, 2017) — Keanu Sai responds to the OHA contract report; the underlying Hawaii News Now report is no longer online and no archived copy was located

Sources

Each source below is cited to the specific statement it supports in the section above. This list is a summary of those citations, not a general bibliography, and no source is carried over from Kingdom-era history unless it supports a statement about this organization.

Class COrganization-published materials (self-published).Self-published. Reported as the organization's own description, not as an established fact.
Class COrganization published materials.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No independent registration record confirming the date was located.
Class COrganization publications.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. U.S. and state courts have rejected continuity arguments raised as a defense; see State v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994).
Class ENo source located in the records reviewed.None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Absence from the records reviewed is not evidence that no such record exists. This site's review is limited to publicly reachable sources.
Class DSecondary references only: 1864 Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom; no archival scan or authoritative reproduction was located in this review.Single independent source. Accessed September 6, 2026. The archival text is independently held; its present-day operative effect is contested.
Class COrganization publications and its principal's own court filings; no independent scholarly source was identified in this review.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Activity is concentrated in one principal figure.
Class COrganization-published notices and recordings (self-published).Self-published. Attendance and continuity were not independently confirmed.
Class AState v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994) and later Hawaiʻi decisions.Independently corroborated. Accessed September 6, 2026. Courts have addressed the arguments as defenses, not as a comprehensive ruling on all continuity questions.
Class DSecondary references only: Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom, PCA Case No. 1999-01; the official PCA case page was not retrievable in this review (HTTP 403) and the award text was read in a third-party reproduction.An arbitration between a private party and an asserted government is not a determination of statehood.
Class COrganization-produced copies.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. No UN registration or response was located.
Class ENo instrument or official state record located.None located. Accessed September 6, 2026. Recognition would be evidenced by the recognizing state's own instrument. Correspondence, meetings, and agreements with nongovernmental or Indigenous bodies do not substitute for it.
Class COrganization-produced accounts; scholarly publications by its principal.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Community and academic engagement is recorded on its own terms and is not an act of recognition by any state.
Class C14 organization-produced sources (class C) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.Class C establishes what the organization documented or asserted; it does not establish that an outside party accepted it.
Archive analysis / methodologyThis site's own source review.Organization-produced only. Accessed September 6, 2026. Organization-produced material is evidence of assertion, not of external acceptance.
Class A4 primary government, court, institutional, or authenticated records (class A) cited in the sourced sections of this profile, excluding these summary lines.
Class APermanent Court of Arbitration case record, Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom.The PCA administers arbitrations between varied parties; administration is not a determination of statehood.
Class COrganization-published copies (self-published).No UN registration or response located.
Class AState v. Lorenzo, 77 Haw. 219 (1994)The court rejected a Kingdom-continuity defense because the defendant did not establish his factual premise. Commentators dispute how far the holding reaches.
Class COrganization principal's own publications and court filings; no independent scholarly review of them was identified in this review.Publication is not adjudication; the argument remains contested.
Class ENo source located.Requires source review.
Class AHawaiʻi state court records and contemporaneous news coverage (outcome recorded; no docket number, opinion citation, or specific article located in this review).The conviction concerns title-company conduct and is separate from his later scholarly and arbitration work.
Class EEditorial policy of this site.

Last reviewed

This profile was last reviewed on September 6, 2026. Statements about the absence of a record describe the records reviewed on that date only.