----- Original Message -----
From: RUSSELL DIABO
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 6:57 AM
Subject: Ipperwash proves we need a new approach to land rights
Friday » August 25 » 2006
Ipperwash proves we need a new approach to land rights
Alex Neve and Murray Klippenstein
Citizen Special
Friday, August 25, 2006
What would he be thinking? Close to 11 years ago Dudley George was shot
dead by a police sniper during a peaceful land- rights protest in Ipperwash
Provincial Park. What would he be thinking today as the public inquiry looking
into his 1995 killing draws to an end? Would he be thinking that after so many
years, justice is finally within reach?
The range of witnesses, amount of testimony and mountain of documentation
has been enormous. The wealth of experience and expertise available to the
commission has been impressive. That has been amply on display this week as the
commission has heard closing submissions from the many parties directly
involved in the inquiry, including Mr. George's family, the Ontario Provincial
Police, former premier Mike Harris, former attorney general Charles Harnick, as
well as organizations that are deeply concerned about the crucial issues being
examined.
Over these past two years, the commission has grappled with many issues,
including policing, racism and government accountability. At the heart of the
inquiry, though, is the issue of land. For land was and remains at the root of
the tragedy that led to the killing of Dudley George. Justice, therefore, will
primarily come through ensuring that the longstanding violation of the land
rights of Dudley George and his people are remedied.
Aboriginal land and resource disputes are by no means an uncommon
occurrence in Canada. The current heated conflict at Caledonia is a clear
reminder of that. What is often overlooked is that the disputes are not just
about dollars and cents. At stake in these disputes are essential human rights,
protected in the Canadian Constitution and international law.
Land and resource rights have been legally established in many cases. But
frequently the existence of such rights is ignored or contested by governments
across the country. That does not in itself mean that the right is not
legitimate. It does mean that the right has not been officially recognized in a
manner that is readily protected by the justice system. Meanwhile, efforts by
indigenous peoples to assert those rights, perhaps by occupying lands in
protest or hunting in contravention of licensing regulations, are readily
characterized as criminal acts. That is what happened to Dudley George and
others involved in the Ipperwash protest.
Without a doubt the immediate and prominent labelling of the Ipperwash
protest as an illegal act is a key factor in an aggressive and rapidly
escalating police operation that ultimately resulted in the killing of Dudley
George.
There appears to be no dispute that the lands at the heart of the
Ipperwash dispute had originally been promised to the indigenous community at
Stoney Point in perpetuity for their exclusive use as reserve lands in a
detailed written treaty with the Crown in 1827. It is also clear that the
treaty lands were taken away a century later, in part by pure force through
expropriation, and in part through a 1928 "surrender" under the unilaterally
imposed Indian Act, a process marked by lack of consent and by apparent illegal
Indian agent land speculation. That is why Dudley George took the stand that he
did. The original clear agreement that his people would always have a homeland
was ignored. This is the reality the Canadian justice system must address.
As the Ipperwash Inquiry draws to a close, it is time for a new approach
to resolving land and resource disputes in the country.
There is a legitimate role for conventional approaches to law enforcement
in protests or disputes of this nature. Clearly, for instance, police must act
when there is evidence of impending or actual violence, whomever the
perpetrators or victims of that violence may be, provided police action is
proportional and even-handed.
However, there is also a pressing need for a conceptual shift within
government, police and the courts. Attempts by indigenous peoples to assert
land and resource rights, including through acts such as apparent trespass
which might otherwise be considered illegal, should be approached in part with
a human-rights perspective in mind. Some officials and commentators argue that
this is unacceptable and even dangerous as it risks putting indigenous peoples
above and beyond the law. In fact, it ensures that the entirety of "law"
governs, certainly incorporating the legal obligation to protect human rights,
including the specific rights of indigenous peoples.
Canada's binding obligations under the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination have been described by the
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination as a duty to "recognize
and protect the rights of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use
their communal lands and territories ... and, where they have been deprived of
their lands ... without their free and informed consent, to take steps to
return those lands and territories."
The Ipperwash Treaty lands on which Dudley George was protesting seem to
fit that description, but the obvious question of whether they should simply be
returned to the native community is a question long ignored.
If there had been an appropriate and effective means to resolve the
underlying land dispute at Ipperwash in a fair and timely manner, with an
acknowledgement that lost treaty lands might need to be returned to indigenous
communities, the deadly events of Sept. 5, 1995, almost certainly would not
have happened. What better way to evidence the dawn of a new approach than to
ensure redress of the particular land rights violations at the heart of the
Ipperwash tragedy? Return of these lands would offer powerful redress as well
to Dudley George's family, as his death came about due to his efforts to
recover that land and assert the rights of his people.
Alex Neve is the Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada.
Murray Klippenstein is the legal counsel for the family of Dudley George.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2006
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Native News North
List info{all lists}:
http://nativenewsonline.org/natnews.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NatNews-north/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
