Inuit Win Injunction Against Seismic Testing

Residents from five communities — Resolute Bay, Arctic Bay, Grise Fiord, Clyde River and Pond Inlet — are largely opposed to the plan to send sound blasts through the water, saying the sound could adversely affect whales, polar bears and other marine life, and change migration patterns.

The Nunavut government and the federal government argued against the injunction, citing a consultant's report stating the testing would have little or no impact on marine mammals.

But Judge Cooper noted "some aspects of the report ... cause concern." She said the fact the report contains protocols to mitigate the impact of seismic activity on marine wildlife supports the conclusion that there are impacts.

"I am satisfied that Inuit in the five affected communities will suffer irreparable harm if an injunction is not granted," Judge Cooper ruled in granting the injunction.

The group that sought the injunction, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, stated it welcomed the ruling, however it was unfortunate the Inuit needed to go to court to have their voices heard. The group had maintained that public hearings in May and June did not amount to the "meaningful consultations" required.

"I look forward to the day when the advice of Inuit and their representative organizations is sought prior to seeking project approval," said Okalik Eegeesiak of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association.

Harvard Report Says BC Mining Laws Need Reform

"First Nations suffer the consequences of a regime that favors mining over the environment and indigenous culture," said Bonnie Docherty, lead author, lecturer and clinical instructor at IHRC.

The report makes a series of recommendations concerning appropriate consultations and planning for aboriginal rights and mining.

"First nations have to be involved in planning and selecting places that are acceptable for development. Right now, miners can go wherever they want." Said Anne Marie Sam, chair of First Nations Women Advocating Responsible Mining.

Researchers specifically examined how B.C.'s Mineral Tenure Act is affecting the Takla Lake First Nation, which has about one-third of its traditional territories subject to mineral claims.

The study is especially critical of B.C.'s online system that allows miners anywhere in the world to register claims on First Nation territory at the click of a button, without consulting aboriginal communities. Since online staking began in 2005, stakes have increased fivefold.

"I'm hoping this report will help change the Mineral Tenure Act," said Chief Dolly Abraham of the Takla Lake First Nation, "I have a band member who found a stake has been made right where her home is."

Canada's Assembly of First Nations Chief Shawn Atleo voiced his support for the recommendations, adding the Takla Lake situation is echoed in First Nations communities across the Canada.

Mississaugas Paid for Deceitful Land Purchase

The settlement covers two transfers of land, now parts of Burlington and Toronto. In the Brant Tract purchase of 1797 the MNC sold the Crown 3,450 acres of land located near Burlington Bay on Lake Ontario. According to MNC the Crown paid less for the land in 1797 than had been promised at an earlier date. In the 1805 Toronto Purchase the MCN surrendered most of what is now metropolitan Toronto for a mere 10 shillings (roughly $60).

"Finally, 200 years later, an injustice is about to be corrected," Toronto Mayor David Miller said June 8, 2010 adding, "Canada took more land and paid less than was promised."

"We would like to thank you for your ongoing commitment, dedication, and caring for the tradition land of our people." responded Chief Bryan Laforme adding the settlement will enhance relationships between MCN and Toronto.

The settlement offer was overwhelmingly approved, 856 to 41, by the eighteen hundred MCN community members. Band members will get $20,000 each and $1,500 annually to cover living expenses. For those under 18, money will be held in trust. Money will be set aside for life insurance and post-secondary education; the rest will be placed in trust. The annual interest will be used for economic development projects or community facilities.

The land claim was launched by former chief Maurice LaForme in 1986. It fell to son Bryan LaForme, current Chief, to see the process to its conclusion. Bryan's brother Harry LaForme, a judge on Ontario's Court of Appeal, was legal counsel for the band and played an instrumental role.

Comment

Article: Ottawa Buries Environment-law Changes in Budget Bill - Supreme Court agrees that Crees should be consulted about land use By Matthew Coon Come, Published by The Gazette, June 8, 2010 "... On May 14, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the federal government is obligated to apply the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act to proposed development projects within our traditional territory. In this important court case, the Quebec government had filed an action in court to exclude CEAA from applying to mining projects in the province because it claimed jurisdiction over the development of resources..." View the full June 8, 2010 The Gazette article

Aboriginal Peoples Key to Boreal Agreement

No provincial governments are involved; governments designate protected lands, license forestry company operations, and implement woodland caribou strategies. The private agreement between the parties is now public (see below). These forest management areas also contain towns, roads, dams, mining, tourism, and other developments. Approximately one third of the license areas are considered productive for forestry operations.

The organizations include: the Canadian Boreal Initiative, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Canopy, the David Suzuki Foundation, ForestEthics, Greenpeace, The Nature Conservancy, Pew Environment Group, International, Boreal Conservation Campaign, Ivey Foundation, and 21 companies - from the Forest Products Association of Canada.

The forest companies agreed to shift from conventional logging practices to ecosystem-based management in their boreal land bases. In return, environmental groups who signed on will suspend "do not buy" campaigns against the participating companies while the agreement is in place. Certain of the forestry companies do not hold license areas in the boreal.

The David Suzuki Foundation issued column to say First Nation participation is essential for the agreement to be viable. Greenpeace Canada, according to media leaks, is debating its participation in the agreement.

Most boreal regions in Canada are also First Nation traditional territory, and in many cases treaty land entitlements, aboriginal rights, and title issues remain unresolved. Throughout the boreal, government is required to consult with and accommodate Aboriginal people prior to development decisions that may affect Aboriginal rights.

Chief Ghislain Picard of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador (AFNQL) commented, "The intentions… must obviously be backed up by a genuine and tangible willingness to involve the First Nations that have rights over these lands."

Grand Chief Stan Beardy of Nishnawbe Aski Nation (NAN), Ontario indicated in his press release: "The right of consent is reflected in the spirit and intent of both Treaty 9 and Treaty 5, this is our right. We must be part of the decision making, benefit from resources in our traditional territory, and be involved in how the land is managed."

Quebec (A.G.) v. Moses

The case revolved around a proposed vanadium mine in an area regulated by the Treaty. The Quebec and federal governments disagreed over how many environmental impact assessments were required, as the treaty stated "...a project shall not be submitted to more than one impact assessment."

The tailing pond required for the mine would cause harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, and the federal fisheries department therefore refused to grant a permit.

Under Canada's constitution mining is under provincial jurisdiction, but fisheries and water stays under federal jurisdiction.

The Attorney General of Quebec argued that the federal fisheries Minister had no choice but to grant a permit.

The respondents, led by Dr. Ted Moses (former Grand Chief of the Council of Crees, Chief Cree negotiator of the James Bay Treaty, and current President of the Secretariat to the Cree Nation Abitibi-Témiscamingue Economic Alliance) argued that a federal assessment was not incompatible with the treaty.

The court concluded that there was no conflict between the Treaty and federal laws. Therefore the mine could not proceed without a federal fisheries permit.

First Nations: Canada Should Embrace UN Declaration

The UN Declaration provides a principled framework for partnership and reconciliation between states and Indigenous Peoples. Its provisions provide much needed guidance to governments, state institutions and society as a whole on how human rights laws and obligations can be best understood and applied to the distinct circumstances and urgent needs of 370 million Indigenous People around the world.

There are calls for Canada's government to work in genuine partnership with Indigenous Peoples for unqualified endorsement and full implementation of the Declaration. Groups also highlight that an endorsement must honour the spirit and intent of the Declaration consistent with Indigenous Peoples' human rights.

This statement was signed by Assembly of First Nations; Inuit Circumpolar Council Canada; Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami; Native Women's Association of Canada; Assemblée des Premières Nations du Québec et du Labrador; First Nations Summit; Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs; Chiefs of Ontario; Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee); International Organization of Indigenous Resource Development (IOIRD); Quebec Native Women/Femmes Autochtones du Québec; Samson Cree Nation; Ermineskin Cree Nation; Montana Cree Nation; Louis Bull Cree Nation; Innu Council of Nitassinan; Indigenous World Association; First Peoples Human Rights Coalition; Amnesty International; Canadian Friends Service Committee (Quakers); KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Initiatives.

Indigenous Peoples: Culture, Identity & UN Declaration

The speakers discussed indigenous peoples' vision of development in today's rapid societal transformation, globalization and climate change, and explored ways to reinforce collaboration between indigenous peoples, governments and the UN system as a whole.

• Indigenous peoples' aspirations: Future under 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
• What is meant by 'development with culture and identity' in context of globalization and climate change?
• How can the UN system support indigenous peoples in making their aspirations a reality?

• Traditional livelihoods have to be promoted and encouraged because they maintain biodiversity and have a low ecological footprint, but also because they are the roots of indigenous peoples' identity.
• Governments should include international legislation in national policies so indigenous peoples are granted full citizenship without renouncing their cultural identity.
• Governments and international organizations should work directly with indigenous peoples and indigenous organizations.
• The United Nations should build a strategy to listen to indigenous peoples so they contribute their knowledge, know-how and worldviews to international issues.
• Education and capacity-building programmes in reproductive health care and home-based care are needed to overcome high mortality rates.
• Local, indigenous peoples' languages face extinction in many areas of the world.
• Sustained efforts are needed to push for partnership-building, inclusion of indigenous peoples' issues, in budgets, development of indicators and research.
• Identity has to be considered in capacity building to create sustainable relationships, in addition to natural and political environments/relationships.
• Identity must be regarded in an inclusive, not exclusive process leading to harmonious coexistence.

New Zealand Affirms Rights of Indigenous Peoples

"Today's announcement restores our mana and our moral authority to speak in international fora on issues of justice, rights and peace," stated New Zealand's Minister of Maori Affairs, Dr. Pita Sharples.

"While the declaration is non-binding, it both affirms accepted rights and establishes future aspirations. My objective is to build better relationships between Maori and the Crown, and I believe that supporting the declaration is a small but significant step in that direction," added New Zealand's Prime Minister, John Key.

When the UN General Assembly adopted the UN Declaration on the Right of Indigenous Peoples (hereinafter simply Declaration) on September 13, 2007: 143 countries voted in favour, 11 abstained, while 4 countries (New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the United States) opposed the Declaration.

The day following New Zealand's announcement, Washington's U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice announced that the U.S. would be reviewing it's opposition to the Declaration.

Canadian Governor General Michaelle Jean, in her March 03, 2010 Speech from the Throne, declared: "A growing number of states have given qualified recognition to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Our Government will take steps to endorse this aspirational document in a manner fully consistent with Canada's Constitution and laws,"

Despite the apparent reversal of positions, it remains to be seen when Canada or the U.S. will affirm the Declaration, or what caveats they will demand in return.

First Nations Take Oil Sands to Supreme Court

DFN Chief Don Testawich stated, "Our traditional territory is being overrun and cut to pieces by oil sands, major pipelines, gas fields and major power projects. Companies projects that will fuel unsustainable oil sands growth. Development on this scale is making our Treaty Rights meaningless and threatens our traditional way of life".

Chief Testawich added, "The governments of Alberta and Canada sit back and refuse to address our concerns. We are intervening before the Supreme Court because it is abundantly clear that neither the environment nor First Nations can expect to receive a fair hearing within Alberta, where oil sands revenues are at stake. We need help now and help fast".

The First Nations are taking this matter to the Supreme Court because of their mounting frustration over refusal by the governments and their regulators to act on earlier court decisions that direct governments to deal with their rights. Canada''s Supreme Court will hear views of First Nations, governments and industry in the Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council case whichwill address the question of whether regulatory boards and tribunals have a duty to decide whether the Crown adequately consulted and accommodated First Nations'' concerns before granting approvals for resource development.

Mercury Killing Grassy Narrows Citizens

Dr. Harada's study found Health Canada safety mercury guidelines are too weak to protect people from long-term health impacts of low level mercury exposure, which is now worldwide due to industrial pollution from sources such as pulp mills, and coal power plants. The translated study was released on the 40th anniversary of the first fishing ban due to mercury contamination on the Wabigoon River.

Between 1962 and 1970, the Dryden mill, owned by Reed Incorporated and Great Lakes Forest Products Limited, dumped 20,000 pounds of mercury into the Wabigoon River. Members of Grassy Narrows First Nation converged on Queen's Park April 7th 2010 to protest decades of mercury poisoning in their community.

"We're demanding justice and action on this issue," states Grassy Narrows Chief Simon Fobister.

"The people of Grassy Narrows have raised their concerns for forty years, only to have them fall on deaf ears," states Ontario Regional Chief Angus Toulouse. "The demands of Grassy Narrows First Nation are simple and achievable - it is time for the government to listen to the voices of the First Nation."

Union of BC Indian Chiefs
Supports Opposition to Sun Peaks Inc.

"The Union of BC Indian Chiefs fully supports the efforts of Chief Wilson and Chief Leon to ensure that the rights of their respective communities are recognized, respected and protected," stated Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs. "What started as a recreational tenure for a local ski hill, has turned into a massive four-season high-density resort which now desires to incorporate as a municipality."

In March 2007, the UBCIC Chiefs Council passed Resolution 2007-21 which noted the efforts in 2007 of Chief Wilson and Chief Leon to respond to the work of the Sun Peaks Incorporation Study Committee. Specifically, they stated their communities' opposition to the municipal incorporation and to the proposed Ministry of Forests' road construction to Sun Peaks Resort until their Aboriginal Title and Rights were addressed and their interests fully reconciled.

Grand Chief Phillip added, "The Union of BC Indian Chiefs fully supports meaningful consultation that respects Aboriginal Title and Rights and not a process where the economic or commercial interests of the privileged few trump ecological values and constitutionally protected Indigenous Title and Rights."

First Nations Have Less Environmental Protection

"As a result, people living on reserves have significantly less protection from environmental threats than other communities," says Ms. Fraser.

The report stated that contrary to regulations under the Indian Act, most landfill sites and sewage treatments on reserves operate without permits, monitoring, or enforcement by INAC. Septic systems, wastewater discharges, and hazardous waste are some of the environmental threats not subject to regulation on reserves, but which are strictly controlled off reserves.

The Auditor General also found that despite INAC's commitment to transfer more control to First Nations over management of their lands and resources, their access to land management programs and training is limited.

The INAC agreed with all of the comments made in the Auditor General's Report and states throughout the report that they will work to develop strategies to identify and close regulatory environmental gaps on reserves.

Court Decisions - Aboriginal Rights and Métis Peoples

• Métis Nation history
• defining Métis communities
• historic Métis trials
• the law of Aboriginal rights and how that law applies to the Métis
• recent Métis harvesting cases - Goodon (Manitoba), Powley (Ontario), Willison (B.C.), Laurin3 (Ontario) and Kipp Kelley (Alberta)
• Aboriginal title and Métis title
• constitutional interpretation and obligations (jurisdiction, interpretation of the term "Indian" in the Natural Resources Transfer Agreements, equality rights, etc.)
• class actions (residential schools, Métis veterans claim)
• Métis-specific legislation

Recent Court Decisions - Aboriginal Rights