SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A First Nations protest At Queen's Park in Ontario (Credit: Rainforest Action Network/cc/flickr)
Win for 'Rightful Stewards of the Land': Canadian Court Sides With First Nations
Ruling marks first time Canadian Supreme Court grants aboriginal land title
Jun 26, 2014
In a landmark ruling on Thursday with potential implications for the planned Northern Gateway pipeline, Canada's Supreme Court unanimously granted an aboriginal land title to the Tsilhqot'in First Nation, giving them claim to more than 1,700 square kilometers in British Columbia.
"British Columbia breached its duty to consult owed to the Tsilhqot'in through its land use planning and forestry authorizations," the 81-page decision (pdf) states.
"I didn't think it would be so definitive," said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. "I was actually prepared for something much less."
The decision rejected the narrow view of what qualified for protection under aboriginal rights from a 2012 ruling by the B.C. Court of Appeal. While the lower court had said aboriginal groups must be able to prove intensive historical use of a specific site, Thursday's decision accepts a broader set of criteria particularly important for the Tsilhqot'in, a historically "semi-nomadic" people. Indigenous groups must now prove a looser definition of occupation, continuity of habitation on the land, and exclusivity in an area in order to be granted a title.
"It only took 150 years, but we look forward to a much brighter future," said Chief Phillip. "This without question will establish a solid platform for genuine reconciliation to take place in British Columbia."
The ruling will potentially apply to any lands in the country that were never ceded to the crown, including lands which the Northern Gateway pipeline is slated to run through, and many others that have been the sites of development and resource extraction.
"They are the rightful stewards of their lands, and should be the ones to decide if and how they are developed," said Maude Barlow, National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians, which intervened in the case in support of the Tsilhqot'in, in a statement released by the group. She stated her optimism that the decision is a sign "that there is no blank cheque for the Northern Gateway project."
While the Tsilhqot'in are overjoyed with the ruling, there may be some unforeseen negative aspects to it that will still allow for corporate exploitation of aboriginal lands. As the Toronto Star reports:
... [T]he ruling will also be welcomed by industry and governments because the high court says provincial and federal governments may regulate economic activity like forestry on title lands. Lawmakers can do so either by consulting and getting consent of the aboriginal group, or by establishing a pressing and substantial public purpose and ensuring the regulated activity fulfils the Crown's "fiduciary" duty to act in good faith for the benefit of aboriginal peoples.
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Max Ocean, Editorial Intern
Max Ocean was an editorial intern at Common Dreams in 2014. He now is Vice President at Subversive Malting & Brewing in Ithaca, NY.
In a landmark ruling on Thursday with potential implications for the planned Northern Gateway pipeline, Canada's Supreme Court unanimously granted an aboriginal land title to the Tsilhqot'in First Nation, giving them claim to more than 1,700 square kilometers in British Columbia.
"British Columbia breached its duty to consult owed to the Tsilhqot'in through its land use planning and forestry authorizations," the 81-page decision (pdf) states.
"I didn't think it would be so definitive," said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. "I was actually prepared for something much less."
The decision rejected the narrow view of what qualified for protection under aboriginal rights from a 2012 ruling by the B.C. Court of Appeal. While the lower court had said aboriginal groups must be able to prove intensive historical use of a specific site, Thursday's decision accepts a broader set of criteria particularly important for the Tsilhqot'in, a historically "semi-nomadic" people. Indigenous groups must now prove a looser definition of occupation, continuity of habitation on the land, and exclusivity in an area in order to be granted a title.
"It only took 150 years, but we look forward to a much brighter future," said Chief Phillip. "This without question will establish a solid platform for genuine reconciliation to take place in British Columbia."
The ruling will potentially apply to any lands in the country that were never ceded to the crown, including lands which the Northern Gateway pipeline is slated to run through, and many others that have been the sites of development and resource extraction.
"They are the rightful stewards of their lands, and should be the ones to decide if and how they are developed," said Maude Barlow, National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians, which intervened in the case in support of the Tsilhqot'in, in a statement released by the group. She stated her optimism that the decision is a sign "that there is no blank cheque for the Northern Gateway project."
While the Tsilhqot'in are overjoyed with the ruling, there may be some unforeseen negative aspects to it that will still allow for corporate exploitation of aboriginal lands. As the Toronto Star reports:
... [T]he ruling will also be welcomed by industry and governments because the high court says provincial and federal governments may regulate economic activity like forestry on title lands. Lawmakers can do so either by consulting and getting consent of the aboriginal group, or by establishing a pressing and substantial public purpose and ensuring the regulated activity fulfils the Crown's "fiduciary" duty to act in good faith for the benefit of aboriginal peoples.
_____________________
Max Ocean, Editorial Intern
Max Ocean was an editorial intern at Common Dreams in 2014. He now is Vice President at Subversive Malting & Brewing in Ithaca, NY.
In a landmark ruling on Thursday with potential implications for the planned Northern Gateway pipeline, Canada's Supreme Court unanimously granted an aboriginal land title to the Tsilhqot'in First Nation, giving them claim to more than 1,700 square kilometers in British Columbia.
"British Columbia breached its duty to consult owed to the Tsilhqot'in through its land use planning and forestry authorizations," the 81-page decision (pdf) states.
"I didn't think it would be so definitive," said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. "I was actually prepared for something much less."
The decision rejected the narrow view of what qualified for protection under aboriginal rights from a 2012 ruling by the B.C. Court of Appeal. While the lower court had said aboriginal groups must be able to prove intensive historical use of a specific site, Thursday's decision accepts a broader set of criteria particularly important for the Tsilhqot'in, a historically "semi-nomadic" people. Indigenous groups must now prove a looser definition of occupation, continuity of habitation on the land, and exclusivity in an area in order to be granted a title.
"It only took 150 years, but we look forward to a much brighter future," said Chief Phillip. "This without question will establish a solid platform for genuine reconciliation to take place in British Columbia."
The ruling will potentially apply to any lands in the country that were never ceded to the crown, including lands which the Northern Gateway pipeline is slated to run through, and many others that have been the sites of development and resource extraction.
"They are the rightful stewards of their lands, and should be the ones to decide if and how they are developed," said Maude Barlow, National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians, which intervened in the case in support of the Tsilhqot'in, in a statement released by the group. She stated her optimism that the decision is a sign "that there is no blank cheque for the Northern Gateway project."
While the Tsilhqot'in are overjoyed with the ruling, there may be some unforeseen negative aspects to it that will still allow for corporate exploitation of aboriginal lands. As the Toronto Star reports:
... [T]he ruling will also be welcomed by industry and governments because the high court says provincial and federal governments may regulate economic activity like forestry on title lands. Lawmakers can do so either by consulting and getting consent of the aboriginal group, or by establishing a pressing and substantial public purpose and ensuring the regulated activity fulfils the Crown's "fiduciary" duty to act in good faith for the benefit of aboriginal peoples.
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.