Opinions

Aboriginal Self-Government: Say No to the Indian Act

ASHLEY STACY
Contributor

The disillusioned view that Aboriginal self-government is derived from the Indian Act (Act) is a dangerous one indeed. A popular myth is that First Nations cannot administer their own justice systems without the federal government’s “approval” or without complying with the Act. This presumption is warranted since Aboriginal people have been trying for centuries to develop as independent nations, while carrying the burden of this legislation on their shoulders. That being said, it is time to return to our roots, for the Act, with all its fame and glory, was initiated as an assimilation tool and continues to remain outdated and oppressive.

Most Aboriginal courts have been set up within the limited confines of s. 107 of the Act. This section states:

107. The Governor in Council may appoint persons to be, for the purposes of this Act, justices of the peace and those persons have the powers and authority of two justices of the peace with regard to

(a) any offence under this Act; and
(b) any offence under the Criminal Code relating to cruelty to animals, common assault, breaking and entering and vagrancy, where the offence is committed by an Indian or relates to the person or property of an Indian.

The Aboriginal Justice Commission, an advocate for aboriginal self-government, makes it clear that the fact that First Nations have worked with federal bureaucracy should not be interpreted to mean full compliance or acquiescence to a derivative form of government dependent upon delegated powers from a federal authority. The Commission further elaborates that Indian bands operating under provincial or federal laws, such as the Act, was most likely the result of being denied more appropriate arrangements, and should not be misunderstood as Aboriginal nations relinquishing their rights.

Still, the level of restriction dominating the Act is inevitably the result of goals towards colonialization. This section was created as a means to place power in the hands of Indian agents, not First Nations. First Nation communities can use this section to assert some control over the administration of justice but it can be best described as only a short-term measure. Thus, while section 107 courts may be a step towards self-government, it is a small step indeed.

If a First Nation community wishes to assert full jurisdiction over the administration of justice, these powers should not have to be delegated by the federal or provincial government, rather it should be recognized that Aboriginal people are constitutionally protected and have the power to govern their own territories. Aboriginal nations should be choosing how to develop their own justice systems, without the “permission” of federal authority. There is no greater understanding of Aboriginal values, customs, traditions and beliefs than through the eyes of the native people. As Carl Roberts, former chief of the Roseau River Band stated:

The imposition of foreign laws as supreme is totally unjust. The notion that English Common Law and French Civil Law supersede First Nations Law was and is based on racist and colonist attitudes. To imagine inviting a person into your home and having that person dictate to you that your authority and your laws are of no value and that theirs is supreme is totally racist and borders on insanity.

Therefore, we must promote self-government. If we fail to do so, we may lose another generation of youth to the Act.