| Amnesty
International's Statement of Support |
PRESS RELEASE February 18, 2008 Canada: Algonquin leader faces jail time while Ontario government ignores the law Amnesty International expressed its concern today over the sentencing of Ardoch Algonquin First Nation negotiator Bob Lovelace to six months in jail and a fine of $25,000 for his role in a protest over uranium exploration on disputed land in eastern Ontario. The Ontario government has licensed Frontenac Ventures to carry out exploratory drilling on land that is part of a 25-year-old Algonquin land claim. The Ardoch Algonquin and Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nations have said that they were not even notified about the plans before trees were cut and blasting began. On June 29, 2007, members of the Ardoch Algonquin and Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nations moved to block Frontenac's access to the site. The occupation ended after the province entered into talks about possible consultation processes, but these talks broke down earlier this month and the blockade was resumed. On February 15, Lovelace and Ardoch co-chief Paula Sherman were convicted of contempt of court for failing to obey two injunctions against the occupation. While Sherman was able to reach an agreement to avoid jail time if she stays away from the protest, Lovelace has said he cannot make the same commitment. A number of Algonquin supporters are also expected to be brought to trial in March accused of violating the same injunctions. "The situation defies justice," says Craig Benjamin, Amnesty International Canada's Campaigner for the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples. "Indigenous leaders and their supporters are facing stiff punishments for doing what they feel is necessary to protect rights that may one day be upheld in court or in the land claims process. Meanwhile the provincial government is ignoring its own legal obligations without any accountability." Canadian courts have clearly established that whenever the rights of Indigenous peoples may be affected, governments have a legal duty to ensure that there must always be meaningful consultation to identify and accommodate Indigenous concerns. Depending on the potential impacts, courts have found that this legal duty may include other more stringent measures "to avoid irreparable harm", including in some cases agreeing to proceed only with the consent of the affected peoples. Shortly before the blockade began last summer, a high level provincial inquiry into Indigenous land rights disputes in Ontario concluded that "the single biggest source of frustration, distrust, and ill- feeling among Aboriginal people in Ontario is our failure to deal in a just and expeditious way with breaches of treaty and other legal obligations to First Nations." The Ipperwash Inquiry report went on to recommend that provincial laws, policies and practices must be reformed to ensure that they are consistent with the government's legal obligations toward Indigenous peoples, including the duty of consultation, accommodation and consent. The fact that provincial mining laws and policies are out of step with the constitutional duty of meaningful consultation is acknowledged in a January 2007 discussion paper issued by the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines. Despite this, the province continues to allow companies to stake claims and initiate exploration with little or no consideration of Indigenous interests. In addition to the conflict over uranium mining in eastern Ontario, leaders from the Kitchenuhmaykoosib First Nation in northern Ontario are awaiting sentencing for contempt of court after continuing to oppose drilling activities in the face of an injunction. In the initial ruling in that case, the court sharply criticized the Ontario government for not having "heard or comprehended" repeated court affirmation of the duty of meaningful consultation and accommodation. Amnesty International is calling on the province to work with Indigenous peoples to undertake immediate reform of provincial laws and policies that fail to respect and uphold the duty of meaningful consultation, accommodation and consent. The province must also take urgent measures to address conflicts arising from its past failures to uphold that duty including by: •
committing to a negotiated resolution of the dispute; For more
information: Amnesty
International Canada ----------------------- News Release Ontario: Latest land rights confrontation illustrates urgency of Ipperwash recommendations Public Statement September 6, 2007 Twelve years ago today, Indigenous rights protester Dudley George was killed by an OPP officer after a Labour Day occupation of disputed land at Ipperwash Provincial Park. A long overdue provincial inquiry into the events surrounding his death issued its recommendations on May 31, 2007. The Inquiry report concluded that, “the single biggest source of frustration, distrust, and ill feeling among Aboriginal people in Ontario is our failure to deal in a just and expeditious way with breaches of treaty and other legal obligations to First Nations.” The report went on to state that “if the governments of Ontario and Canada want to avoid future confrontations they will have to deal with land and treaty claims effectively and fairly.” Almost a month later, a confrontation over uranium exploration on lands claimed by the Shabot Obaadjiwan and Ardoch Algonquin First Nations illustrates the urgent need for the Province of Ontario to implement the recommendations of the Ipperwash Inquiry. The provincial government has licensed a company, Frontenac Ventures, to carry out exploratory drilling on 60 square kilometres of land that the government considers to be crown land. The land is part of a much larger area in the Ottawa River watershed, that has been the subject of a land claim since 1983. Representatives of the Algonquin people, who have never entered into a treaty with the Canadian crown, say this is unceded territory in which their rights must be respected. The Shabot Obaadjiwan and Ardoch Algonquin First Nations say they were not informed about plans to drill on the contested land. On June 29, members of these communities occupied a former mine site being used as headquarters for Frontenac’s exploration activities. Frontenac responded by filing a $77 million lawsuit against the protestors and obtaining an interim injunction to remove the protestors. The Algonquin, who withdrew from the injunction hearings in order to press for a negotiated political solution, have refused to leave the site. They have called for a moratorium on uranium mining on the disputed land. The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) reported to have demonstrated sensitivity to the underlying rights issues in their response to date and have not tried to forcibly remove the protesters. Canadian court decisions, dating back 17 years, have found that governments have a duty to consult Indigenous peoples and work in good faith to accommodate their concerns prior to taking any decision -- such as licensing resource exploration – potentially impacting their rights and interests. This obligation exists in every instance, even where the underlying land rights are still in dispute. Courts have also found that in instances where a strong case can be made that Indigenous peoples’ inherent or treaty rights are at stake and the potential for harm to these rights is particularly serious, governments should proceed only with the consent of the affected peoples. The province of Ontario has come under mounting criticism over its failure to implement this duty in its management of natural resources. Last year, in a similar case in northern Ontario where the junior mining company called Platinex began exploration without adequate consultation with the affected people, a Superior Court judge sharply criticized the province for “abdicating” its legal responsibilities to Indigenous peoples. The Platinex decision was cited by the Ipperwash Inquiry which called on the government of Ontario to work with Indigenous peoples to revise provincial laws, regulations and policies to bring them in line with these established legal obligations. The Ontario Mining Act and other provincial legislation for the licensing of resource development are key flash points for conflict over Indigenous land rights. Amnesty International believes reform of these laws should be given urgent priority. In the meantime, the province must provide clear instruction to all its officials to ensure that the duties of consultation and consent are fulfilled before decisions are taken that could impact on Indigenous peoples’ use of the land. Furthermore, where disputes have arisen, the province should take all reasonable measures to ensure that underlying Aboriginal and Treaty rights are respected and protected. When corporations or other parties seek an injunction against Indigenous peoples, the Ipperwash Inquiry called on the province to intervene to ensure that the court is made aware of the underlying issues of Aboriginal and treaty rights that are at stake. Although provincial officials have recently offered to meet with representatives of the Shabot Obaadjiwan and Ardoch Algonquin First Nations, Amnesty International is deeply concerned that the province failed to act sooner to uphold its obligation to protect the rights of Indigenous peoples, including at the point when the exploration permit was granted. When the government of Premier Dalton McGuinty was elected in 2003, one of its first acts was to call the Ipperwash Inquiry. The upcoming provincial election will be the first since the Inquiry made its report. Given
the urgent need for better understanding and protection of Indigenous
rights in the province, Amnesty International believes all candidates
should use the opportunity of the election to affirm their support for
implementation of the report’s recommendations. |