Ottawa’s UNDRIP law has been criticized by various camps

Federal Bill C-15 has gathered criticism from a myriad of stakeholder groups on public policy and law. Among them are advocates of more action on reconciliation, those who want more resource sector development opportunities for indigenous communities, and the erosion of Canada’s sovereignty seeking its own legislative and policy solutions. There are people who are concerned about.

Bill C-15The law, which respects the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), aims to promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples around the world.UN General Assembly adopted UNDRIP September 2007, but Canada then voted against it— Due to concerns about natural resources and land use.

Canada will officially support the 2010 UN Declaration, but its domestic implementation remains elusive. New Democrat Romeo Saga Nash legislator on declaration in June 2019, following conservative senator concerns that aligning Canadian law with UNDRIP could have legal and economic implications Was blocked in the Senate.

Bill C-15 is the latest attempt at federal approval. Indigenous legal expert and bill critic Bill Gallagher said UNDRIP “indigenous people with constitutional rights, constitutional rights, and more than 300 legal streak wins. It wasn’t designed to help. “

“The UN Declaration aims to protect indigenous peoples in Paraguay, Bolivia and Mexico who do not have safety nets,” Gallagher said in a recent interview.

British Columbia was the first Canadian jurisdiction to pass legislation to implement UNDRIP. Like BC’s 2019 bill, Federal version It includes a guarantee of indigenous peoples’ rights, stating: “This law should be construed as supporting the rights of indigenous peoples recognized and confirmed by Article 35 of the 1982 Constitution, and does not abolish or condemn indigenous peoples.”

Russell Diabo, a member of the Kahnawake Mohawk Nation, who has been active in indigenous politics since he was a teenager, said UNDRIP could be subject to existing Canadian law under Article 35, expanding the government’s declaration. It claims to be depriving it of rights designed to admit. Those.

“Bill C-15 mentions indigenous peoples’ rights, which relies on Section 35. The problem with that is that the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision has been going on for over 30 years … [that] He said these rights were not absolute and could be legitimately infringed for legislative legislative reasons. So the final title belongs to the crown, “Diabo told The Epoch Times, adding that if the bill were passed, more problems would arise.

“If there is a clear indigenous society in progress, some accommodation will be needed within the Canadian Federation for that kind of awareness. Otherwise, land-resource conflicts will continue to grow. “

Mr. Diabo tries to fill in the proposed bill with unresolved issues such as the truth of how Justin Trudeau “jumped into a settlement and Canada acquired all of this land, and assumed the sovereignty of the king.” He states that he considers it an “attempt.”

Resource development concerns

First Nations Plenary Session (AFN) Chief Perry Bellegarde April 13 Before the Indigenous Peoples of Parliament and the Northern Affairs Commission studying legislature.

Issue 19 of 46 UNDRIP articles for indigenous groups “Free, advance, and informed consent” Prior to the state’s adoption and implementation of laws or administrative measures that could affect them, it was considered a veto for projects such as oil and gas pipelines and hydropower.

No, Bergard told the Commission.

“One of the most important rights we have is the right to self-determination, which is the right to say” yes “and the right to say” no “, and each project is valued for its own benefits. Should be, “he said.

“For me, that’s what this bill is talking about — joint decision-making, [industry and government] Avoid blockades and avoid court battles, as you will be involved sooner or later. “

Last March, Stephen Buffalo, President and CEO of the Indian Resource Council, said: Articles that are very critical of the lawIn particular, the impact on resource sector development, saying that it causes “serious harm” to indigenous communities whose economies are heavily dependent on the resource sector.

“Oppositions of resource development are armed with a narrow interpretation of this one clause, claiming that they empower dissident groups within indigenous communities to fight projects that are actually supported by a wide range of communities. “Masu,” writes Buffalo.

“It will take years for Canadian courts to define the powers and restrictions of free and informed consent. Tentatively, this concept is freely used by environmentalists and anti-development protesters. Claims that indigenous people (not necessarily indigenous governments) have the right to suspend the project.

Potential impact on sovereignty

Other critics of the bill include Tom Flanagan, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Calgary. Tom Flanagan said the bill would interfere with future legislators and erode sovereignty from within.

“”[UNDRIP] It clearly states that it should not be read in order to undermine the sovereignty of any nation. … It says it does not support separatism by groups leaving jurisdiction. Therefore, we do not directly challenge Canada’s sovereignty, but we do hollow out one of the attributes of sovereignty, the ability to enact legislation, “Flanagan said.

“If the bill is passed and interpreted in a particular way, it severely limits the government’s ability to reach legislative solutions for resource development, and in fact for other policies as well.” He added.

“We’ve talked about resource development, but that’s just a small part of what UNDRIP can affect. Most of it is related to all sorts of things, including language, education, and healthcare. I will. “

On April 13, AFN lawyer Mary Ellenter Perla Fondo dismissed criticisms such as “fueling fear”, stating that Article 19 “promotes certainty.”

“The Declaration as an International Document is to assist us in better discussing the rights of indigenous peoples under Article 35,” she told the Commission.

“There are many indigenous peoples across Canada who have fought hard to confirm their rights through Article 35 … [so] This idea does not limit the UN Declaration. … We will create space with this bill and bring more life to Section 35. “