Learning Goal: I’m working on a cultural studies discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.
Please write a reflection Will UNDRIP lead to greater respect for Indigenous human rights in Canada? Why? using I think or in my opinion.Elected vs. Traditional Chiefs: What’s the difference in Indigenous communities?
The Chief and Council that are elected by the members in their respective First Nation hold authority over reserve lands and their infrastructure, but are accountable to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. These electoral systems are a result of section 74 of the Indian Act, imposed on First Nations by the government of Canada. It was designed to replace the traditional systems that had been in place for thousands of years, and create something more recognizable for the Canadian government. It is important to note that this form of (elected) government was imposed involuntarily on First Nations.
Often, traditional Chiefs oversee the territories (which are larger than the reserve lands) and hold ceremonial and historical importance to First Nations. They are caretakers of the people and the culture, and they often consider decision making from the perspective that decisions made today must be in the best interests of their people in seven generations. There are many types of traditional governance structures, and the best way to learn more is to ask!
Both forms of leadership may be recognized in an Indigenous community, and both may play important (and complimentary) roles for the community.
“Ever since the arrival of the colonizers and the imposition of their governance systems throughout Canada, the Aboriginal peoples have resisted and struggled to reconstitute their traditional forms of political representation and governance practices, to maintain control of their own affairs, and to have governments be accountable to them.”
The Honourable Gerry St. Germain, P.C.
“Ever since the arrival of the colonizers and the imposition of their governance systems throughout Canada, the Aboriginal peoples have resisted and struggled to reconstitute their traditional forms of political representation and governance practices, to maintain control of their own affairs, and to have governments be accountable to them.”
The Honourable Gerry St. Germain, P.C.
Case Study: Wet’suwet’en
Many of you will be familiar with the pipeline dispute over the Coastal GasLink pipeline in northern British Columbia. One of the dimensions of this disagreement includes the roles and responsibilities of traditional Chiefs vs elected Chiefs and Councils. The elected Chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en Nation had agreed to the pipeline, however some of the traditional (hereditary in this case) Chiefs were in opposition.
The video below should help with your understanding of the history of these structures, the different roles and responsibilities, and how the history and different roles contributed to the pipeline dispute.
Specific Claims
Some disputes relating to land are called specific claims and come from the historic treaties signed with First Nations between 1701 and 1923. Specific claims deal with First Nation grievances against the Crown and arise where Canada is deemed to have failed to meet its obligations under Treaties or other agreements, or in how it has managed First Nation funds or assets. Specific claims are resolved through negotiated settlements that provide compensation for a past wrong.
Comprehensive Claims
Comprehensive land claims (sometimes referred to as modern Treaties) arise when First Nation rights and title have not been dealt with by treaty or through other legal means. In areas where this has occurred, comprehensive land claim and self-government agreements can be jointly negotiated between a First Nation and Canada and, where applicable, provincial and territorial governments.
Case Study: Mackenzie Meadows Development, Caledonia.
Many of you will be aware of the ongoing protest by Six Nation of the Grand River members that has been ongoing in Caledonia since the summer of 2020. This is a highly complex issue that began hundreds of years ago.
On October 25th 1784, Sir Frederick Haldimand (the then governor of Quebec), signed a decree that granted a tract of land to the Haudenosaunee (also known as the Six Nations). The Haldimand Grant or Haldimand Tract, extended for 10 km on both sides of the Grand River(southwestern Ontario) from its source to Lake Erie.
The Haldimand Proclamation has been a source of dispute between the Crown and the Haudenosaunee since its inception. The Caledonia dispute is one of the longest and most violent land-claim disputes in Ontario history, with the primary issue of contention being about land claims and land title, and the underpinning issue being about Indigenous rights and sovereignty. These issues are contentious and complex, and are not easily resolved, as they involve multiple parties, including the Haudenosaunee, provincial and federal governments, and current residents of the disputed territories.
You can learn more about this issue in the video below.
What is the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP or “the Declaration”) is a non-binding resolution passed by the United Nations in 2007 that delineates and defines the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples, including their ownership rights to cultural and ceremonial expression, identity, language, employment, health, education and other issues.
The Declaration further emphasizes the rights of Indigenous peoples to maintain and strengthen their own institutions, cultures and traditions, and to pursue their development in keeping with their own needs and aspirations. It sets out, according to the Declaration document itself, what the rights that constitute “the minimum standard for the survival, dignity and well-being of the Indigenous peoples of the world”. You can read the full Declaration here.
It is important to note that the Declaration is not a treaty, nor is it a legally binding instrument under international law. The implication of this is that if any country wants the Declaration to be a part of its laws, it must pass its own legislation to do so.
Recent Comments