Assembly Of Nations Research Articles

Using participatory research to communicate environmental health risks to First Nations communities in Canada

ABSTRACTThis paper describes a network of three interconnected, multidisciplinary research projects designed to investigate environmental health issues faced by First Nations in Canada. These projects, developed in collaboration with academia, used a participatory approach meant to build capacity, raise awareness, and initiate change. The first project, which began in British Columbia in 2008, gathered information on the traditional diet; for example, its composition, nutritional quality, and potential for chemical exposure. This 10-year, Canada-wide project served as a model for two follow-up projects: one on biomonitoring and another on indoor air quality. All three projects provided community ownership over the data and communicated results in a culturally sensitive manner to encourage interest in research and initiate risk reduction activities. The Assembly of First Nations, a national advocacy organization representing over 630 First Nations communities across Canada, participated in all aspects of the research while coordinating communications and arranging timely dissemination of results. These projects showed how properly executed, community-based research can be a valuable tool for stimulating interest in scientific studies while promoting self-reliance, components often missing from academic research.

The Broad Implications of the First Nation Caring Society Decision: Dealing a Death-Blow to the Current System of Program Delivery On-Reserve & Clearing the Path to Self-Government

On January 26, 2016, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) released a watershed decision in a complaint spearheaded by the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada, its Executive Director, Dr. Cindy Blackstock, and the Assembly of First Nations (the “Caring Society” decision). The complaint alleged that Canada, through its Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs (“INAC” or the “Department”), discriminates against First Nations children and families in the provision of child welfare services on reserve. In its decision, the Tribunal found that INAC’s design, management and control of child welfare services on reserve, along with its funding formulas, cause a number of harms to First Nations children and families that amount to discrimination, most notably among these is the systemic underfunding of such services. Canada has decided not to appeal the decision. The decision is the first in Canada to begin to examine the problems and harms existing within the current system of program delivery in First Nations communities. These problems and harms are not unique to the delivery of child welfare on reserve, but extend to all core services including health, social welfare, assisted living, daycare, education, housing and infrastructure, policing and emergency services. In First Nations communities, all of these services, although delivered by First Nations themselves, are governed by a complex web of federal funding directives, policies and funding agreements, wherein the primary program delivery standard is ‘comparability’ with the provinces/territories services. The current system of program delivery on reserve has been variously described as “program devolution,” “self-management,” and “self-administration.” Unless referring to a specific feature of this system, I generally refer to all of it herein as the current system for program delivery on reserve, or “CSPD” for short. Over the years, the Auditor General of Canada has raised numerous concerns with CSPD. In 2011, the Auditor General went so far was to say that it “severely limit[s] the delivery of public services to First Nations communities and hinder[s] improvements in living conditions on reserves.” The CSPD, which has been in place for decades despite several calls for reform by the Auditor General and others, is so convoluted that it is almost impenetrable. But the Caring Society decision has shed light on some of it ugly features and, most importantly, arms First Nations with the necessary tools to finally dismantle this entirely unacceptable system. In this paper, I detail how CSPD has come to be, how it operates and how it has persisted over numerous decades despite several calls to implement self-government in its stead. Next, I shed a light on all of its ugly features by setting forth an inventory all of the problems and the harms it causes First Nations people. Systemic underfunding is but one among many of the serious harms caused by CSPD. Finally, I discuss how the Caring Society decision has discredited significant parts of CSPD and how the decision can be used to unravel the rest. I argue that the decision points us to the one true alternative to this unacceptable system — First Nations self-government — which is long overdue.

The time has come to fix the Non-Insured Health Benefits (NIHB) program.

In April 2015, the Auditor General of Canada released a report looking at the deplorable delivery of health care services in remote First Nations communities. The poor state of health care delivery to First Nations people in Canada should come as no surprise to pharmacists or any other health provider, regardless of the community setting. For many years, pharmacists and provincial pharmacy associations have raised concerns and issues with the operation of the Non-Insured Health Benefits (NIHB) program, the federal program that delivers health care to Canada’s First Nations people. These problems have included inadequate communication of policy changes, lack of standardized scope of practice and compensation models, lack of clarity regarding patient coverage benefits, inadequate travel arrangements and many others. Too many pharmacists have said that they are often put in the position of having to explain NIHB policy details or changes that should rightfully be communicated by NIHB themselves. Pharmacists have not been alone in raising concerns with NIHB. Many other health providers have raised similar and additional concerns as those expressed by pharmacists, and the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) has been particularly vocal in raising its concerns with the program. This is why in 2014, the federal Minister of Health and the Grand Chief of the Assembly of First Nations announced a full-scale review of the NIHB program. The purpose of this review, which is expected to last until 2017, is to conduct a thorough examination of NIHB operations and policies with the expectation of significant program reform. In spring 2015, the working group tasked with conducting this review (comprising representatives from AFN and the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch of Health Canada) issued a Critical Path document identifying the major sectors and issues that the review will address; pharmacy has been identified as one of the key sectors slated for specific examination starting in December 2015. In 2014, the Canadian Pharmacists Association (CPhA) brought together and has since led a coalition of 8 national health provider organizations looking to be engaged in the NIHB review. As a result of this leadership, the review has agreed that the perspective of health provider groups needs to be considered as part of this review process. CPhA has also engaged with provincial pharmacy associations to better understand their specific concerns and issues with NIHB from a pharmacy perspective and has communicated those concerns to the AFN. Regarding next steps, the health provider organizations, including CPhA, have agreed to consult individually with their own members to get thoughts and feedback on measures that could be taken to improve NIHB policy and operation. This feedback is expected to be collected over the summer and early fall of 2015 and will help inform the process moving forward, including the examination of pharmacy-specific issues. The challenges facing NIHB and delivery of health care to First Nations people in Canada are daunting, and therefore this process will take time. But with health outcomes that are significantly lower than the average Canadian, First Nations people in Canada should be a priority population when it comes to improving the delivery of health care in Canada. The voices of pharmacists and other health providers as part of this review will provide an invaluable contribution, as will their ongoing efforts to deliver improved day-to-day care. CPhA looks forward to continuing to lead health providers in adding their voices to this process. ■

The settlement process: A personal reflection

This paper discusses the author’s personal experiences as the chief negotiator of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement for the Assembly of First Nations. She discusses the key and central role the AFN played in the formulation of the Settlement Agreement, the values and principles that informed the Assembly’s positions and strategies, and some of the behind-the-scene steps that led to its rapid adoption. She argues that reconciliation is a long-term project that will require more than reparations and that Canada must take the major responsibility for creating conditions for reconciliation, which it is not presently doing. She argues that the legal profession and the law must be more context sensitive and take Aboriginal laws and values into account or justice to the Aboriginal population will never be achieved.

A clash of paradigms? Western and indigenous views on health research involving Aboriginal peoples.

To explore the issues of data management and data ownership with regard to health research conducted in aboriginal or indigenous populations in Canada. Research with aboriginal communities in Canada has often been conducted by researchers who had little or no understanding of the community in which the research was taking place. This led to 'helicopter' research, which benefitted the researcher but not the community. National aboriginal leadership developed the ownership, control, access, and possession (OCAP) principles, which outline how to manage research data regarding aboriginal people and to counteract disrespectful methodologies. However, these principles present their own set of challenges to those who would conduct research with aboriginal populations. Documents from the Assembly of First Nations, the Government of Canada, Aboriginal writers and researchers, and Nursing theorists and researchers. This is a methodology paper that reviews the issues of data ownership when conducting research with Aboriginal populations. The authors explore indigenous and Western views of knowledge development, outline and discuss the OCAP principles, and present the Canadian Institute of Health Research's guidelines for health research involving aboriginal people as a guide for those who want to carry out ethical and culturally competent research, do no harm and produce research that can benefit aboriginal peoples. There are special considerations associated with conducting research with Aboriginal populations. The Assembly of First Nations wants researchers to use the Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP) principles with First Nations data. These principles are restrictive and need to be discussed with stakeholders before research is undertaken. In Canada, it is imperative that researchers use the Canadian Institute of Health Research Guidelines for Health Research Involving Aboriginal People to ensure culturally sensitive and ethical conduct during the course of the research with Aboriginal populations. However, some communities may also want to use the OCAP principles and these principles will need to be taken into consideration when designing the study.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Genesis and Design1

Abstract How and why did Canada end up with a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) rather than a judicially based public inquiry in response to Indian Residential Schools? Using a constructivist-interpretivist approach with interview research with twenty-three key actors, this article traces the path toward the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement. It examines in particular the shift from calls for public inquiry to truth and reconciliation. In sourcing the idea of a TRC, it gauges the balance between transnational influences and home-grown elements and suggests that two different approaches to a truth commission were merged during the settlement negotiations. One approach, associated with the Assembly of First Nations, focuses on accountability and public record, and the other, associated with survivor and Protestant organizations, is more grassroots and community-focused. This article looks at hybridity and gaps in the TRC’s design, suggesting that the two visions of a truth commission continue to exist in tension.

Non-insured Health Benefits for First Nations and Inuit People: an Overview for Information Providers

The Non-insured Health Benefits (NIHB) program provides First Nations and Inuit people in Canada with coverage for a limited range of medically necessary goods and services. These can include prescription drugs, dental care, vision care, medical supplies and equipment, short- term crisis counselling, and medical transportation (1). This article provides health librarians and other providers of consumer health information with some background on the program, differing perspectives on the legal and treaty requirements for service provision, the health literacy implications, and the role of a Treaty 7 NIHB Navigator in service delivery. Background and perspectives on the provision of NHIB Health care has been perceived in vastly different ways by government and First Nations people. Government support of medical services for First Nations, Inuit, and Metis people has a long history and various departments have been responsible over the years. The Medical Services Branch of Health Canada (MSB) was created in 1962 when various field services were merged with the Indian Health and Northern Health Services. MSB was renamed the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch in 2000 and now administers NIHB (2). The federal government claims the NIHB program supports registered First Nations and recognized Inuit in reaching an overall health status comparable to other Canadians. Though their health status is not equal and comparable, First Nations and Inuit people continuously work to ensure their health needs are met and are equal to other Canadians, and they assert that health benefits are an inherent Aboriginal and Treaty right and are constitu- tionally protected (3). In 1974, the federal government's position was written in a policy that stated there were no statutory or treaty obligations for providing health services to Indians, though the federal government would provide services and give financial assistance when medically necessary (2). They had also previously noted in 1957 that under Treaty Six medical care was an obligation, but medical services for all Indians were provided on humanitarian rather than on legal grounds (4). This difference in perspective creates barriers and jurisdictional issues around access to health care for First Nations and Inuit people. Treaty Six is the only treaty that specifically mentions health care in its text, which includes the clause for a medicine chest to be held at the Indian agent's home and offers emergency help, for example during epidemics. These clauses have been interpreted in various ways, particularly around the extent of care (4). However, the Supreme Court affirmed that the terms of treaties are not limited to the text in the treaty, but rather include the actual agreements between the parties (3). Historical documents show that several other treaty negotiations included discussions about the provision of medical services, but those discussions did not appear in the final text of the treaty (4). In addition to these specific clauses in Treaty Six, there are other supporting arguments around treaty rights and health care. Historical events support the First Nations assertion that medical care was tied to treaty rights. The connection between treaty and health care was solidly entrenched, with doctors frequently in attendance when treaty annuities were paid out, so much so that people at York Factory in Treaty Five spoke out in anger when no doctor accompanied the annuity treaty payments of $5 in 1915 (4). From a First Nations historical perspective, disagree- ments over jurisdiction and responsibility for the delivery of medical services influence current obstacles to access for First Nations and Inuit patients. These obstacles can include funding for the NIHB program, effective commu- nication, limited transportation, and in many cases, limited access to provincial health services and programs if clients reside on reserve. When the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) assessed the NIHB program in 2005, they found that increases in funding levels were only limited to an estimated population growth rate. Health needs and cost drivers were not considered as part of the funding equation (3). As well, cutbacks in the 1990s confused clients as benefits were delisted, eligibility and access changed, and generic drugs were encouraged; these changes continue today. Before certain medications could be accessed at a

Developing an e-Community Approach to Community Services in Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation

Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation is a leader in community and social services. This rural First Nation – the largest Algonquin community in Canada - has since 1980 successfully supported community members to take ownership of service development and delivery. They have made many services and programs available to community members, including: an elementary and secondary school, a day-care, a community hall, a community radio, a health centre, a police department, a youth centre, and others. Their community services are led and staffed by fully trained and qualified community members. As computers, broadband internet and cellular services have become available in Kitigan Zibi, the service sectors have been integrating these technologies with a goal of improving services for and communications with community members. However they face many challenges in their efforts to remain innovative and plan for future delivery of services using technologies. Our study, based on qualitative analysis from interviews with 14 community services staff in Kitigan Zibi, will explore their current successes, challenges, and future potential for integrating information and communication technologies (ICT) into services that promote community and social development. The analysis discusses the eCommunity approach advocated by the Assembly of First Nations.

Permutations of Sovereignty in the Priestly Tradition

Abstract According to P and H, Israelites can in some respects be seen as “sojourners” (גרים) not just in foreign lands but also in the land given to Abraham’s seed. As one would expect, Israelites are also viewed as citizens in their own land, yet ironically this is affirmed in H passages such as Lev. 24:22 and Exod. 12:49 which call for equality between natives and immigrants. The paper suggests that P and H are engaged in a debate with the Deuteronomistic traditions about the significance of political sovereignty and citizenship. The priestly writers mimic imperial symbolism and imply that the “many nations” descended from Abraham (Gen. 17:4), and the “assembly of nations” descended from Jacob-Israel (Gen. 35:11), would embody an imperial rather than national sovereignty.

Water and Indigenous Peoples: Canada’s Paradox

The condition of water safety and quality on reserve has been a growing concern in Canada. Despite a substantial amount of funding allocated toward improving water infrastructure on reserve, an alarming proportion of communities face boil and drinking water advisories. To understand why this paradox and problem persists, this article will work through the issues and nuances that have created unsafe drinking water on reserve, proposed remedies, and policy implications. To do so, the role of the Government of Canada is reviewed first because reserve land is under federal jurisdiction. Following this, the article will discuss the standpoints of the Assembly of First Nations and other Indigenous groups on the water crisis, and will draw upon focus groups within First Nations that we conducted. To contextualize the water issue on reserve in Canada, a comparison with the United States is then drawn. One of the main themes of this paper with regard to the issue of safe drinking water on reserve is how the legacy of colonization has limited community capacity. This theme is then discussed in depth by comparing Indigenous to non-Indigenous communities, looking to the social determinants of water quality, and possibilities and limitations of building sustainable development allowing for safe drinking water on reserve. To understand what processes consistently intervene in the way of sustainability of safe water in Indigenous communities, regulatory frameworks are examined, funding mechanisms are reviewed, and Aboriginal governance is discussed along with the direction that policy should take.

Legislation introduced to regulate water quality on reserves

New federal legislation that would eventually establish drinking water and wastewater standards on reserves begins to address important public health issues but must be accompanied by adequate financial resources, says the Assembly of First Nations (AFN). The short bill — which must still pass

Used and abused

There is an image of my father that sticks in my mind: he is a child about six years old attending the Old Sun Residential School.1 As he tells it, he was extremely lonely and wanted to go home. The residential staff would not allow this and would punish him. One day while showering, he decided to go. He ran naked from the school towards North Camp, where his family lived, about 20 miles away. I have this image of my father as a child running naked through the tall grass leaving Old Sun School behind him. This is only one of many incidents that occurred for my father, one that he will tell among many that he won't - until now, forced through a semi-legal process of recounting residential school experiences cloaked in the 'heaUng' paradigm and financial gain. As I write this, my father is undergoing his formal interview regarding his experience at the Old Sun Residential School.2 It has been a stressful time for him, remembering experiences that he has kept within his being for most of his Ufe. While I can see and have experienced the damage these experiences have caused him, I can only imagine the pain, suffering and psychological damage these experiences have created within him and the intergenerational effects that form a continuum of dysfunctional being. To reUve these experiences has not been that easy for a man who is deeply private and suspicious of institutions. My father questioned the interviewers during the interview: 'Why do we have to go through this process? The Japanese Canadians did not have to do this as a part of determining their settlements/ This is a question that comes to my mind and I wonder whether this is yet another layer of ethnocide within the colonial project - a layer more insidious as it provokes individuals to reUve painful experiences over and over again in the name of 'heaUng'. If you receive a settlement, some funds are set aside for 'counselUng', which are accessible only should the individual determine to seek psychological help. Isn't this yet another way in which the government is telhng Aboriginal people 'how to be'? It seems that the 'Indian Agent' ethos of controlUng the Uves of Aboriginal people is alive and well. As I was a day-school student for four years, I apply to the Common Experience Program to consider my case. Even though I have heard that day students will not be considered, I am encouraged to apply by many statements including those made by officials in the program and the Assembly of First Nations. After filUng out the government forms, then sending more information at their request, I receive months later in the mail a standardised letter from Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada: 'We regret to inform you that after reconsideration of your Common Experience Payment apphcation, we are still not able to confirm your residence at the Indian Residential Schools indicated on your apphcation/ For many people who attended day school - having had the same common experience as residents - their apphcations have been denied. The loss or inaccurate recording of information has been a problem for verification; for many people, their experiences have been invahdated or put into question, creating another class of residential school survivor - one that might never reaUse their place in the residential school experience commons. I am not a supporter of the 'Common Experience'. I recognise that the process might be good for some. I suspect that, in the end, many will not reause its touted benefits. For instance, a physician on my reserve indicates that he has never seen things so bad, that the stress resulting from the rehving of these past experiences has brought about suicides, attempted suicides, depression, alcohohsm/drug abuse and violence within the community. It is a new epidemie that furthers the destruction of a people. I am personally frustrated, angered and sad as I see the toll this process has taken on many people, including family and friends. …

Conference Report – “The Genocide Convention” International Conference: Commemorating its 60th Anniversary (4 – 6 December 2008 Marburg, Germany)

In 1944 Raphael Lemkin wrote in his book titled Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: “By Genocide we mean the destruction of a nation or an ethnic group.” Four years later, on 9 December 1948 the term “genocide” coined by Lemkin simply by merging the Greek word “genos” (people) and the Latin word “caedere” (to kill) was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in the Genocide Convention. Now, six decades later an international conference on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Genocide Convention took place from the 4th – 6th December in Marburg and the city of Frankfurt in Hesse/Germany sponsored mainly by the German Foreign Office and the Fritz-Thyssen Foundation. The main purpose was to discuss the implications of the genocide convention from 1948 on an international platform with scholars from different countries and disciplines.

Jordan's principle: Editorial update

Jordan's principle: Editorial update

First Nations and Inuit Mental Wellness Strategic Action Plan

Many First Nations and Inuit communities in Canada confront historical, cultural, socioeconomic and geographic barriers that have a profound impact on mental wellness. In 2006, a Senate Committee reported on mental health, mental illness and addiction. A key result has been the creation of the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC). Around the same time, Health Canada established a Mental Wellness Advisory Committee (MWAC) in collaboration with the representative bodies of Canada's First Nations and Inuit ‐ the Assembly of First Nations and the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami ‐ to develop a strategic action plan to improve mental wellness outcomes of First Nations and Inuit. A participatory, inclusive and consensus‐based approach to the MWAC work has been key to the successful development of the strategic action plan and has brought credence and legitimacy to the process. MWAC, the strategic action plan and the ready linkages with the MHCC are important guides for moving forwards to improve the mental wellness outcomes of Canada's First Nations and Inuit.

A Conversation with Mililani Trask

Mililani Trask was born into the world of politics and struggle for Native Hawaiian and human rights. Her grandfather, David Trask, was an early member of the Hawai'i Democratic Party, the first Hawaiian sheriff in Honolulu, and a member of the Territorial Legislature for twenty-six years. Her maternal grandmother, Maui-born Iwalani Haia, was one of the first women to organize the Benevolent Societies on Maui and played a key role in the movement to inform Hawaiians of the events surrounding the overthrow of Queen Lili'uokalani in 1893. Mililani is the niece ofArthur Trask, well-known orator, lawyer, and politician, and David Trask, Jr, a politician and a key player in labor organizing and collective bargaining for higher wages and better working conditions for public workers. Mililani is descended from the Pi'ilani line of Maui and the Kahakumakaliua line of Kaua'i. Born and raised on O'ahu, the fourth of five children of Bernard and Haunani Trask, Mililani was educated at the Kamehameha Schools. Following her graduation in 1969, she attended the University of Redlands and San Jose State University in California. In 1977, Mililani returned home with a law degree from Santa Clara University. In 1990, Mililani became the first elected kia'āina or governor of Ka Lāhui Hawai'i, a Hawaiian nation formed in response to the United States' colonial dominance. She was a prominent figure in the Hawaiian political spotlight for over eight years during her leadership of Ka Lāhui Hawai'i. In 1993, she served on the prestigious Indigenous Initiative for Peace under the direction of Nobel Laureate Rigoberta Menchu-Tum, the United Nations' Goodwill Ambassador to the UN Decade on Indigenous Peoples. And, in 1995, Mililani became the second vice-chair of the General Assembly of Nations of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organizations, [End Page 142] founded in 1991 by his holiness, the Dalai Lama, as an alternative forum to the United Nations. Then, in 1998, Mililani won a coveted seat on the Board of Trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (oha), the quasi-governmental organization formed in the 1978 Hawai'i Constitutional Convention. She was elected by the largest number of Hawaiian votes cast in any election since oha's inception. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs is an organization that has been the object of attack by independence-minded Hawaiian nationalists since its creation. In 2000, after the Rice decision forced the mass resignation of the oha board members and opened the election process to non-Hawaiians,1 Mililani lost her bid for reelection. She is an advocate of peace and has studied and worked with Mother Theresa of Calcutta for seven years. She founded the Native Hawaiian nongovernmental organization Nā Koa Ikaika o Ka Lāhui Hawai'i, which worked in the international arena on the Draft Declaration for Indigenous Peoples and the World Conference on Racism for the last fifteen years. Today, she has a reputation as an expert on international and human rights law and is a much sought after speaker on native issues. She is currently serving as the Pacific representative on the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, based in New York. Mililani and her sister, University of Hawai'i at Mānoa Professor Haunani-Kay Trask, are outspoken critics of the current movement for the establishment of US federal recognition for Native Hawaiians, symbolized by the "Akaka Bill."2 The original interview took place on 9 July 2003, with follow-up discussions between then and April 2004. Our first meeting took place in Mililani's Hilo office at the Gibson Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded in 1987 to support housing for Native Hawaiians. She focuses on assisting kūpuna or elders in the community by providing advice and project support for home construction and repair. This, she feels, is her life's purpose, working selflessly, without pay for her community. The initial interview lasted for three hours and covered a...

Introduction: Aboriginal Peoples: The Changing Face of Canada

This theme issue of American Review of Canadian Studies deals with the People of Canada. To begin, some background information is in order; it may make your reading of the issue more productive. Defining the people of Canada is somewhat problematic. In the United States, the situation is pretty straightforward: if you carry a tribal identification or have one issued to you through the Bureau of Affairs, you are an Indian. Without the card, you can call yourself an Indian, but governmental agencies will not recognize you as such. In Canada, by contrast, and as Ovide Mercredi, former Grand Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, has pointed out, the Canadian government recognizes seventeen different categories of under the Act. [1] Without detailing these seventeen categories--a daunting task in any case--in Canada there are Status Indians which, more or less, corresponds to the U.S. definition of Indian; that is, they all carry a tribal identification. Ot her in Canada who are Aboriginals without specific tribal membership are called Non-status Indians. In addition to these First Nations people, there are those people who are of mixed Indian and European descent--called Metis. And to complete the official governmental recognition scheme, Canada certainly includes the Inuit of the Arctic under the Aboriginal umbrella. As our legal scholar Kent McNeil reminds us here: The peoples are defined by the Canadian Constitution as including 'the Indian, Inuit and Metis peoples of Canada': as found in section 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982, (U.K.) c.11. Exploring the differences further, the Canadian Constitution says that, The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed (section 35[1]). It is up to the courts to define just what those rights are and how they are to be exercised. current fishing-rights problems in the Maritimes--recognized by the Canadian Supreme Court--are certainly testing that Constitutional rights recognition. While it is true that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that government/Native treaties are indeed the supreme Law of the Land (Article Vi, U.S. Constitution), in contrast to the Canadian experience, the U.S. offers no Constitutional protection to (or explanation of) the aboriginal rights of Native people outside what maybe expressed within a treaty. Instead, the U.S. Constitution gives Congress plenary power over the regulation of affairs (Article 1, section 8). Another notable difference in the history of people in North America is that of war. Native people of the U.S. were subjected to four centuries of genocidal war; the people of Canada--the Beothuk people of the Maritimes being the most egregious exception--were generally spared the ravages of outright genocide. Furthermore, people of Canada did not face the devastating policy of Removal as did their brethren south of the border. But while not facing Removal, the people of Canada certainly suffered (and continue to suffer) through the policy of relegating people to lives of official neglect on reserves. …

Indigenous Rights in the Inter-American System: The Amicus Brief of the Assembly of First Nations in Awas Tingni v. Republic of Nicaragua

In October 1995, the Awas Tingni community of Nicaragua presented a petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (the "Commission") asserting that the government of Nicaragua had breached its obligations under both domestic and international law by failing to guarantee the community's use and enjoyment of its ancestral lands. 1 Those lands, which consist of rain forest located along the northern Caribbean coast of Nicaragua, were the subject of a thirty-year concession for road construction and timber exploitation awarded by the government to a Korean corporation, Sol del Caribe, S.A. ("SOLCARSA"). The Awas Tingni, a Mayagna-speaking people, reside on the lands in accordance with a traditional system of land tenure and subsist on the lands primarily by family and community farming; their culture and social structure are closely tied to their historic occupation of those lands. 2 [End Page 569]

Statement of Grand Chief of the Assembly of First Nations

Statement of Grand Chief of the Assembly of First Nations

International instruments of the United Nations: a compilation of: agreements, charters, conventions, declarations, principles, proclamations, protocols, treaties adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, 1945-1995

International instruments of the United Nations: a compilation of: agreements, charters, conventions, declarations, principles, proclamations, protocols, treaties adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, 1945-1995