Williams Ruling – Native Legal Win # 166

Last week’s headlines proclaimed: “B.C. Court Rules Tsilhqot’in First Nation has no claim to territorial land”. Their claim for broad-based aboriginal title was defeated.

So why am I calling this a native win?

Based on their semi-nomadic historical footprint exercised throughout their traditional lands, the Court of Appeal ruled that this set of facts did not entitle natives to a broad area-wide declaration of aboriginal title. However they were invited to reframe their petition for certain site-specific locations that the court clearly telegraphed could well portend localized aboriginal title declarations.

The court of appeal’s application and extent of aboriginal title in this case is now headed to the Supreme Court of Canada for its review and reconsideration. The issue becomes the broader area wide determinations of aboriginal title that the natives were hoping for – versus – the ‘postage stamp’ localized areas scattered throughout their traditional lands. Yet at the end of the day, aboriginal title will almost certainly apply in some fashion within their territories; just to what extent will depend on the Supreme Court of Canada ruling in two to three years time.

However in all other respects the initial (Justice Vicker’s) ruling was upheld. It’s that ruling that remains the safety net for identifying and substantiating those localized aboriginal title sites.  The reason this ruling is a significant win for natives is that on the aboriginal rights front – they won on every count ‘hands down’ on all counts.

They have an aboriginal right to wrangle wild horses (upheld); an aboriginal right to hunt and trap (upheld); an aboriginal right to trade in skins and pelts in order to realize a ‘moderate livelihood’ (upheld), a declaration that these same rights have been infringed by the ‘totality of forest management’ practices (upheld); which infringement has never been properly justified by the crown (upheld).

When these aboriginal rights declarations are added to the notional aboriginal title sites (albeit yet to be determined) it’s clear that the Tsilhqot’in left court with a very respectable legal win – one that portends significant resource rights and protections throughout their traditional lands.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

One comment

  1. Two extremities of Indian Land claims are possible within Section 35.1 CCAct 1982:

    rights of individual Indians to personal rights, including inheriting Hereditary rights and properties and

    a second extremity that is evolving with the times but is rooted in world history and must be brought to bear on the future of the Planet.

    Judge Vickers touched on the bearing of Indian Title claims on Fee simple, which was conventionally thought to be immune from Indian claims. The “Kitsilano indian Band” (our own legal fiction) intends to restore Potlatch and then institute a process of resolving everyone into a single Indian Land based PROVINCE. What given pairs of Indians and Land Owners will do to entrench their relations is to register all such in the Land Title Registry.

    We hope you appreciate that in former times it would not have been possible for the two groups to meet and deliberate together and that Potlatch had power to sustain the natives, who simply absorbed the western system’s produce into Potlatch.

    The Potlatch Law outlawed the Indian side of the equation in order to let development proceed but now land is in issue, and resources are tied to land.

    Two ad hoc elites have arisen who have made negotiating profitable, to them.

    By setting goals outside of and beyond the status quo, the restored Potlatch can eliminate all of these artificial or procedural distinctions and enable us to be resolved as one.

    It has to be understood that, in all of these things, the Story of Jesus Christ has bearing. History is so structured as to allow Christ to re-enter history and participate in the completion of HIS Kingdoms.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *