Indigenous specific land claims in Canada

Last updated

Indigenous specific land claims in Canada, also called specific claims, are long-standing land claims made by First Nations against the Government of Canada pertaining to Canada's legal obligations to indigenous communities. [1]

Contents

They relate to the administration of land and other First Nation assets by the federal government, as well as to the fulfillment (or lack thereof) of historic treaty obligations and of any other agreements between First Nations and the Crown by the government. [1] For example, this can involve mismanagement of indigenous land or assets by the Crown under the Indian Act . [2] To settle specific claims, the Government of Canada does not take away land from third parties; [1] rather, the government typically resolves specific claims by negotiating a monetary compensation for the breach with the band government, and in exchange, they require the extinguishment of the First Nations' rights to the land in question. [3]

Specific claims are based on lawful obligations of the Crown toward the First Nations, and are separate and distinct from comprehensive land claims or modern treaties. More specifically, First Nations cannot use aboriginal titles or punitive damages as the basis of their claims. [1]

In 2008, an independent judicial body, the Specific Claims Tribunal, was created to give binding decisions to resolve the claims that were not accepted for negotiations, or claims where both parties could not agree on a fair compensation. [2]

The Canadian government started recognizing indigenous specific claims in 1973, whereafter they began negotiating for their settlement. Since then, 1,844 claims have been submitted by First Nation communities. Of these, 935 have been resolved. [4] As of March 2018, 460 claims have been negotiated for settlement by the federal government, while outstanding claims include the 250 that have been accepted for negotiation; the 71 that have come before the Specific Claims Tribunal; and the roughly-160 specific claims that are currently under review or assessment. [2]

Background

Relations between Indigenous peoples and European colonists have been characterized by breaches in the engagements that the colonists made toward the First Nations. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 established that, from that point onward, only the British Crown could engage in treaties or agreements with the First Nations. These agreements include the Peace and Friendship Treaties in the Maritimes; the 11 Numbered Treaties with the First Nations of parts of Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, and the Northwest Territories; and many other regional treaties in southern Ontario and British Columbia. [2]

Despite such agreements, however, the land promised by the treaties were sometimes never allocated. Other times, the Government of Canada made illegal sessions of the land under the Indian Act , or employees at the Department of Indian Affairs fraudulently sold or leased reserve land for their own interests. In other cases, Indigenous groups were inadequately compensated for the sale or damage of reserve lands. The current Indigenous specific claims originate from these outstanding treaty obligations. [2]

History of specific claims

Some First Nations communities started to press their claims from the 19th and early 20th century. However, from 1927 to 1951, prosecuting indigenous land claims in court and using band funds to sue the federal government was prohibited, thereby leaving land claims largely ignored. [5] In 1947, a parliamentary committee recommended that Canada create a "Claims Commission" similar to the Indian Claims Commission in the United States, which was created two years prior in 1945. It was again recommended between 1959 and 1961 that Canada investigate land grievances of First Nations in British Columbia and in Kanesatake, Quebec. [2]

Canada began accepting specific claims for negotiations in 1973. A federal policy created the Office of Native Claims within the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs to negotiate indigenous land claims, which were divided into two categories: comprehensive claims and specific claims. The former deals with the rights of indigenous people to their ancestral lands for traditional use. Specific claim, on the other hand, deal with specific instances of breaches by the government of their obligations toward indigenous communities. [2]

In 1982, nine years after the creation of the Office of Native Claims, only 12 out of the 250 claims filed with the government had been settled. Indigenous communities criticised the fact that the Office was both evaluating and negotiating each claim, thus creating a conflict of interest. They instead called for the negotiation process to be run by an independent body. [2]

In 1992, the Government of Canada created to Office of the Indian Claims Commissioner, whose job was to investigate claims that were refused for negotiations by the Office of Native Claims. However, the Claims Commissioner's powers were limited to issuing non-binding resolutions and thus was ineffective. In their annual reports, Claims Commissioners often suggested the creation of a new independent body to oversee specific claims that could impose binding resolutions on claims where Canada and the First Nations cannot agree on fair compensation. This body came into existence in 2008, with the creation of the Specific Claims Tribunal, where independent jurors assess the claims on a case-by-case basis. [2]

Specific claims process

First Nation communities can start the specific claims process by submitting a claim to the Government of Canada. These claims must meet the minimum standards for specific claims submissions as set out by the Department of Crown–Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, or they are immediately rejected and must be filed again. If a claim meets these requirements, it enters a 3-year assessment period, wherein the government determines whether a breach has occurred or not. If the government determines there was no breach, the file is closed, and the first nation may modify their claim and re-submit it, or challenge the government's assessment in the Specific Claims Tribunal. [1]

When the claim is accepted for negotiations, there begins a 3-year timeframe for the negotiation period where the government and the First Nation try to agree on a fair compensation for the breach. The compensation is usually monetary, and does not typically include added land for the reserve. If no agreement is reached, the First Nation may submit their claim to litigation with the Specific Claims Tribunal. [1]

Ongoing claims

Here are examples of a few ongoing specific claims.

Atikamekw of Opitciwan

The Atikamekw of Opiticiwan filed four distinctive specific claims with the federal government: one related to the losses incurred by the flooding of their village in 1918 due to the construction of the La Loutre Dam and the Gouin Reservoir; one related to the delay in the creation of the reserve; one related to the size of the reserve; and a last one related to the raising of the dam which led to other floods in the 1940s and 1950s. [6]

Map of the planned Indian Reserve of Obijuan (Obedjiwan) in 1914 Map of the Planned Indian Reserve of Obijuan (Obedjiwan).jpg
Map of the planned Indian Reserve of Obijuan (Obedjiwan) in 1914

In 1912, Chief Gabriel Awashish and his band of over 150 Atikameks settled on the land of present-day Obeydjiwan, Quebec, on the coast of a lake of the same name. The area was surveyed in 1914 by surveyor Walter Russell White, in preparation for the creation of a reserve in the Area. The band was promised 3,000 acres (12 km2) for this reserve, but White surveyed only 2,290 acres (9.3 km2) of land. In 2016, the Specific Claims Tribunal ruled that the Crown made no serious efforts to give the First Nation the 3000-acre reserve, and therefore should compensate the First nation for the 710 acres (2.9 km2) missing. [7]

In 1918, the end of the construction of the La Loutre Dam resulted in a flooding destroyed the village of Obeydjiwan, including all of the band's houses and possessions. As early as 1912, the federal government knew that the dam would flood the village, yet they did not notify the band. [8] The compensations for these damages was delayed, and the some Atikamekw were not properly compensated, or not at all. [9] The reserve of Obeydjiwan was finally created in 1950. The 1950 reserve was 2,290 acres, and included land outside of the area proposed for the reserve in 1914 to compensate for the land that had been flooded in 1918. In 2016, the Specific Claims tribunal ruled that the delay for the creation of the reserve was too long, which resulted in loss of income from logging for the Atikamekw. [10]

In 2013, Canadian surveyor Éric Groulx testified in front of the Specific Claims Tribunal that surveyor Walter Russell White miscalculated the area of the land that he surveyed in 1914, stating that the land surveyed had an area of 2,760 acres (11.2 km2) as opposed to 2,290 as was previously calculated. This error resulted in further errors when calculating the area of the land that was flooded in 1918, which was used to add land outside of the proposed reserve. The Specific Claims Tribunal therefore ruled that the First Nation was not properly compensated for the land lost in the flooding. [11]

Kanesatake

The Kanesatake land claim is one of the most politicized land claims in Canada, in parts because of its significance during the Oka Crisis.

The claim originates from the original establishment of the Sulpician mission on the shore of Lac des Deux-Montagnes, where land was set aside for the Mohawks to settle in 1717. However, in 1721, King Louis XV of France granted the Seigneurie des Deux-Montagnes exclusively to the Sulpicians, giving them the legal title to the land. In the 19th century, the Mohawks of Kanesatake started protesting that the Sulpicians were mistreating them to the British authorities. They then discovered that the land they had lived on for over 150 years and they thought they owned was, in fact, not theirs, and started pressing their claim with the federal government. The case went to Supreme Court of Canada in 1910, which ruled that the Sulpicians held the titles to the land. In 1956, the Government of Canada purchased 6 km2 (1,500 acres) of the land previously owned by the Sulpicians for the Mohawks to live on, but did not grant this land reserve status. [12]

In 1975, the Mohawk Council submitted a comprehensive land claims asserting Aboriginal title to lands along the St. Lawrence River, the Ottawa River and Lac des Deux-Montagnes, a claim which was rejected by the federal government. In 1977, the Mohawk council of Kanesatake filed a specific claim regarding the former seigneurie. The claim was rejected the nine years later because it failed to meet key legal criteria. In 2002, the government passed Bill S-24, which established that the relation the government of Canada had with Kanesatake was akin to relations it has with bands with a reserve. [12]

In 2008, the government of Canada accepted to negotiate the claim of the Mohawks of Kanesatake under the specific claims policy for a second time. Former Assistant Deputy Minister Fred Caron was nominated as Chief Federal Negotiator for the file. [13]

Criticism

The Specific Claims process has long been criticized by First Nations for multiple reasons, including the conflict of interest inherent in the federal government both assessing the claim and negotiating them, the slowness of the assessment process and the specific claims process in general, the impossibility of receiving land as compensation, the lack of transparency in Specific Claims funds allocations and the requirement to cede and surrender the land in order to get a compensation for it. The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) praised the creation of the Specific Claims Tribunal in 2008, that addressed some of these problems, but that many of the problems of the Specific Claims Policy were still left unsolved, especially regarding the extinguishment of indigenous rights. [3]

In 2018, the Fraser Institute published a report by conservative political scientist Tom Flanagan which concluded that first nation communities that received a compensation following the settlement of a specific claim did not score better on the Well-Being Index of First Nations than those who didn't. He argues that specific claims were essentially a multi-billion-dollar liability for the government, while statistical evidence showed no positive impact to settling these claims. Flanagan also criticized changes made over the years to the specific claims policy to make it more accommodating to the First Nations, which he blames for creating ever-growing backlog of claims being filed every year. In order to settle all of the specific claims one and for all, Flanagan suggests the implementation of a deadline after which First Nations will no longer be able to file new specific claims. This would be akin to the United States' Indian Claims Commission's 10-year period to file claims, which allowed it to settle all of their indigenous land claims in under 40 years. [14] [15]

In response to Flanagan's report, lawyers Alisa Lombard and Aubrey Charette published an opinion piece in which they said that the intent of Specific Claims is to bring justice to defrauded First Nation communities, and is not a welfare program. Therefore, comparing the First Nation communities who settled a specific claim with those who did not using the Well-Being Index is irrelevant to what the Specific Claims process is trying to accomplish. [16]

A 2018 report by the British Columbia Specific Claims Working Group came to the conclusion that the federal government failed to comply by their legal obligation to assess claims in a 3 years period over 65% of the time. On average, the government finishes assessing the claims 5 months after the legislated deadline. In an open letter to Crown-Indigenous Relations minister Carolyn Bennett, the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs stated that this "[n]on-compliance with legislation enacted to protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples...contradicts every public commitment your government has made regarding reconciliation." Stephan Matiation, director of the Specific Claims Branch at Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, responded that his team is understaffed, which causes delays in the assessment of claims. [17]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Algonquin people</span> Indigenous people of Eastern Canada

The Algonquin people are an Indigenous people who now live in Eastern Canada. They speak the Algonquin language, which is part of the Algonquian language family. Culturally and linguistically, they are closely related to the Odawa, Potawatomi, Ojibwe, Mississaugas, and Nipissing, with whom they form the larger Anicinàpe (Anishinaabeg). Algonquins call themselves Omàmiwinini or the more generalised name of Anicinàpe.

The Oka Crisis, also known as the Kanehsatà:ke Resistance, was a land dispute between a group of Mohawk people and the town of Oka, Quebec, Canada, which began on July 11, 1990, and lasted 78 days until September 26, 1990, with two fatalities. The dispute was the first well-publicized violent conflict between First Nations and provincial governments in the late 20th century.

Indigenous peoples in Quebec total eleven distinct ethnic groups. The one Inuit community and ten First Nations communities number 141,915 people and account for approximately two per cent of the population of Quebec, Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kanesatake</span> Mohawk Territory in Quebec, Canada

Kanesatake is a Mohawk settlement on the shore of the Lake of Two Mountains in southwestern Quebec, Canada, at the confluence of the Ottawa and Saint Lawrence rivers and about 48 kilometres (30 mi) west of Montreal. People who reside in Kanehsatà:ke are referred to as Mohawks of Kanesatake. As of 2022, the total registered population was 2,751, with a total of about 1,364 persons living on the territory. Both they and the Mohawk of Kahnawake, Quebec, a reserve located south of the river from Montreal, also control and have hunting and fishing rights to Doncaster 17 Indian Reserve.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte First Nation</span> Mohawk First Nation in Ontario, Canada

The Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte (MBQ) are a Mohawk First Nation within Hastings County, Ontario. They control the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory, which is a 7,362.5 ha (18,193-acre) Mohawk Indian reserve on the Bay of Quinte in southeastern Ontario, Canada, east of Belleville and immediately to the west of Deseronto. They also share Glebe Farm 40B and the Six Nations of the Grand River reserves with other First Nations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oka, Quebec</span> Municipality in Quebec, Canada

Oka is a small village on the northern bank of the Ottawa River, northwest of Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Located in the Laurentians valley on Lake of Two Mountains, where the Ottawa has its confluence with the St. Lawrence River, the town is connected via Quebec Route 344. It is located 50 km west of Montreal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty 6</span> Treaty between the First Nations and Canadian Crown

Treaty 6 is the sixth of the numbered treaties that were signed by the Canadian Crown and various First Nations between 1871 and 1877. It is one of a total of 11 numbered treaties signed between the Canadian Crown and First Nations. Specifically, Treaty 6 is an agreement between the Crown and the Plains and Woods Cree, Assiniboine, and other band governments at Fort Carlton and Fort Pitt. Key figures, representing the Crown, involved in the negotiations were Alexander Morris, Lieutenant Governor of the North-West Territories; James McKay, The Minister of Agriculture for Manitoba; and W.J. Christie, the Chief Factor of the Hudson's Bay Company. Chief Mistawasis and Chief Ahtahkakoop represented the Carlton Cree.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deseronto</span> Town in Ontario, Canada

Deseronto is a town in the Canadian province of Ontario, in Hastings County, located at the mouth of the Napanee River on the shore of the Bay of Quinte, on the northern side of Lake Ontario.

In Canada, an Indian band or band, sometimes referred to as a First Nation band or simply a First Nation, is the basic unit of government for those peoples subject to the Indian Act. Bands are typically small groups of people: the largest in the country, the Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation had 22,294 members in September 2005, and many have a membership below 100 people. Each First Nation is typically represented by a band council chaired by an elected chief, and sometimes also a hereditary chief. As of 2013, there were 614 bands in Canada. Membership in a band is controlled in one of two ways: for most bands, membership is obtained by becoming listed on the Indian Register maintained by the government. As of 2013, there were 253 First Nations which had their own membership criteria, so that not all status Indians are members of a band.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian Aboriginal law</span> Canadian law regarding indigenous people

Canadian Aboriginal law is the body of law of Canada that concerns a variety of issues related to Indigenous peoples in Canada. Canadian Aboriginal Law is different from Canadian Indigenous law: In Canada, Indigenous Law refers to the legal traditions, customs, and practices of Indigenous peoples and groups. Aboriginal peoples as a collective noun is a specific term of art used in legal documents, including the Constitution Act, 1982, and includes First Nations, Inuit and Métis people. Canadian Aboriginal law provides certain constitutionally recognized rights to land and traditional practices. Canadian Aboriginal Law enforces and interprets certain treaties between the Crown and Indigenous people, and manages much of their interaction. A major area of Aboriginal law involves the duty to consult and accommodate.

The British Columbia Treaty Process (BCTP) is a land claims negotiation process started in 1993 to resolve outstanding issues, including claims to un-extinguished indigenous rights, with British Columbia's First Nations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Doncaster, Quebec</span> Indian reserve in Quebec, Canada

Doncaster, officially designated as Doncaster 17 by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, is a Mohawk Native Reserve in the Laurentides region of Quebec, Canada. It belongs to the Mohawk First Nation, specifically the people of the reserves at Kanesatake and Kahnawake.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Obedjiwan</span> First Nations reserve in Quebec, Canada

Obedjiwan is a First Nations reserve and village on the north shore of Gouin Reservoir in the Mauricie region of Quebec, Canada. It belongs to the Atikamekw of Opitciwan band of the Atikamekw Nation.

Indigenous or Aboriginal self-government refers to proposals to give governments representing the Indigenous peoples in Canada greater powers of government. These proposals range from giving Aboriginal governments powers similar to that of local governments in Canada to demands that Indigenous governments be recognized as sovereign, and capable of "nation-to-nation" negotiations as legal equals to the Crown, as well as many other variations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mohawks of Kanesatake</span>

Mohawks of Kanesatake or Kanehsatà:kehró:non are a Mohawk First Nation in Quebec, Canada. In 2016 the band has a registered population of 2,508 members. Their main reserve is Kanesatake Lands located 48 kilometres (30 mi) west of Montreal. They also share the uninhabited reserve of Doncaster 17 with the Mohawks of Kahnawá:ke for hunting and fishing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Culbertson Tract land claim</span>

The Culbertson Tract Land Claim, located in the Canadian Province of Ontario in Hastings County, is a specific land claim originally submitted by the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte in 1995. It covers 923 acres surrounding the Tyendinaga area and the majority of the Deseronto township. This claim is based on the loss of over 800 acres of land during the continued loyalist settlement during 1820-1843 which proved to be the loss of the majority of the land from the Simcoe Treaty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peepeekisis Cree Nation</span> First Nation in Saskatchewan, Canada

Peepeekisis Cree Nation (Cree: ᐲᐦᐲᑭᓰᐢ, pîhpîkisîs, literal meaning: Sparrow Hawk) is a Cree First Nation in southern Saskatchewan, Canada. Its reserves include Peepeekisis 81; Treaty Four Reserve Grounds 77, which is shared with 32 other bands; and Peepeekisis Cree Nation, which is located 19 km (12 mi) east of Balcarres, Saskatchewan, on Highway 10.

Indigenous peoples in Canada demand to have their land rights and their Aboriginal titles respected by the Canadian government. These outstanding land claims are some of the main political issues facing Indigenous peoples today.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lordship of Lac-des-Deux-Montagnes</span> Seigneury in New France

The lordship of Lac-des-Deux-Montagnes was a seigneury in New France. It was located in the current regional county municipality of Deux-Montagnes Regional County Municipality in the administrative region of Laurentides in Quebec (Canada).

The Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador is a political organization representing the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador. It represents these First Nations to the Secrétariat aux affaires autochtones du Québec and to the ministry of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs of Canada. The AFNQL is composed of representatives from 43 communities in the Abenaki, Algonquin, Atikamekw, Cree, Maliseet, Mi'kmaq, Innu, Huron-Wendat and Naskapi nations, as well as from the Mohawks. The AFNQL does not represent the Inuit or any Inuit community; they are represented by Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "Specific claims". Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. 2020-07-30. Retrieved 2021-05-01.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Gretchen Albers (June 29, 2015). "Indigenous People: Specific Land Claims". The Canadian Encyclopedia . Archived from the original on August 18, 2019. Retrieved September 9, 2019.
  3. 1 2 "SPECIFIC CLAIMS REVIEW: EXPERT BASED ‐ PEOPLES DRIVEN" (PDF). www.afn.ca. May 15, 2015. Archived (PDF) from the original on August 6, 2015. Retrieved 2019-01-13.
  4. ↑ "Summary of Specific Claims by Province". Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. 2018-12-08.
  5. ↑ Johnson, Ralph W. (1991). "Fragile Gains: two centuries of Canadian and United States policy toward Indians". Washington Law Review. 66 (3): 643.
  6. ↑ ICI.Radio-Canada.ca, Zone Société-. "Inondations de terres autochtones : victoire historique pour les Atikamekw d'Obedjiwan". Radio-Canada.ca (in Canadian French). Archived from the original on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2019-01-12.
  7. ↑ "Claim SCT-2006-11, Atikamekw D'opitciwan First Nation v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada - Specific Claims Tribunal Canada". decisia.lexum.com. 2016-05-20. Archived from the original on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2019-01-12.
  8. ↑ News (2016-06-06). "Quebec First Nation wins case against government for 1918 dam that devastated the community | National Post" . Retrieved 2019-01-13.{{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  9. ↑ "Claim SCT-2004-11, Atikamekw d'Opitciwan First Nation v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada - Specific Claims Tribunal Canada". decisia.lexum.com. 2016-05-20. Archived from the original on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2019-01-12.
  10. ↑ "Claim SCT-2005-11, Atikamekw d'Opitciwan First Nation v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada - Specific Claims Tribunal Canada". decisia.lexum.com. 2016-05-20. Retrieved 2019-01-12.
  11. ↑ "Claim SCT-2006-11, Atikamekw d'Opitciwan First Nation v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada - Specific Claims Tribunal Canada". decisia.lexum.com. 2014-10-10. Retrieved 2019-01-12.
  12. 1 2 "Oka Timeline: An Unresolved Land Claim Hundreds of Years in the Making". www.cbc.ca. Retrieved 2019-01-14.
  13. ↑ Canada, Indigenous and Northern Affairs (2010-07-09). "Seigneury of Lake of Two Mountains Specific Land Claim of The Mohawks of Kanesatake: Minister Strahl Appoints Federal Negotiator". gcnws. Archived from the original on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2019-01-14.
  14. ↑ "The perpetual motion machine of specific claims made by First Nations" . Retrieved 2019-01-13.
  15. ↑ "BLOG: Stop the specific claims perpetual motion machine". Fraser Institute. 2018-06-21. Retrieved 2019-01-13.
  16. ↑ Lombard, Alisa; Charette, Aubrey (July 11, 2018). "The specific claims process is about justice for First Nations, not charity: Opinion | CBC News". CBC. Archived from the original on August 26, 2018. Retrieved 2019-01-13.
  17. ↑ Barrera, Jorge (November 26, 2018). "Ottawa blowing deadlines on First Nations historical claims, says report | CBC News". CBC. Archived from the original on January 18, 2019. Retrieved 2019-01-13.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.