The Tricksters Speak: Klooscap and Wesakechak, Indigenous Law, and the New Brunswick Land Use Negotiation

Abstract

In 2015, the University of New Brunswick hosted the Kawaskimhon Talking Circle Moot. The moot problem was based on the case of Buctouche First Nation v. New Brunswick. The applicant First Nation applied to the courts for an injunction opposing the New Brunswick government’s forest strategy. The forest strategy increased the annual harvesting of softwood timber while reducing the area of Crown-protected conservation forest. Participants were assigned clients and asked to represent these clients’ interests and perspectives. This article presents the argument made on behalf of the Council of Traditional Elders and Chiefs of the Mi’kmaq peoples. Their interests consist of protecting the traditional lands of the Mi’kmaq people while recognizing that the Mi’kmaq have a legal duty to the forests upon which they depend. The argument is presented as a dialogue between two Indigenous tricksters—Klooscap (a Mi’kmaq trickster) and Wesakechak (a Cree trickster). The tricksters advance their position using Mi’kmaq law. In particular, the tricksters focus on the environmental and constitutional principle of netukulimk. Netukulimk is a theory of sustainability that is offered as an alternative framework to the colonial laws that currently dominate Canadian Aboriginal legal issues. The use of Mi’kmaq law presents opportunities for self-governance by recognizing and applying Mi’kmaq legal obligations to the natural world. This article concludes with a brief commentary on the application of Indigenous law in this fictionalized context and its future as an influence on and alternative to Canadian Aboriginal law.