Chapter 8: Land Dispossession ~ Systemic Racism ~ Right to Self-Determination

Introduction

I begin this chapter with a reflection. Who are the stewards of the land and earth? Who are the ones who will protect the air we breathe or the water we drink? Who will ensure that these three essential elements necessary for survival are safeguarded? The fourth essential element, fire, can only exist with the first three. All four elements are our relations, and we only exit as a species because of them. So, who are the protectors or stewards of these sacred elements?

Is it the public? Is it the government? Is it non-governmental organizations (NGOs)? Is it other entities like Canada’s top 10 mining companies, whose combined revenue in 2022 topped 100 billion dollars? Is it the coal, oil, and gas sector, which is consistently identified as the main source of greenhouse gas emissions with 100 companies having been the source of more than 70% of the world’s global industrial emissions since 1988. Is it the airlines, who are also major contributor to air pollution, with the global market share reaching 779 billion U.S. dollars in 2023. Air Canada is ranked 10th on the list of the world’s largest airlines with 2023 revenue of $12.7 billion and assets totalling $21.8 billion. Is it the banks, whose “aggregate assets of the 50 largest banks contracted 2% to $89 trillion” in 2022.

I could go on to examine and report on the revenue and profits of transnational corporations in agribusiness, the forestry sector, the fishing industry, and other corporate entities who are in the ‘extractive’ or ‘polluting’ business; and then see what portion of profits go back to activities designed to sustain or protect the elements; but, this is best left to experts, researchers, and scholars to pursue. While I know ‘big business’ has been introduced into the equation on the climate change fight, their commitment and larger contribution to ‘protecting’, ‘sustaining’, and ‘conserving’ are largely nebulous based on my cursory review.

In a recent article titled, The determinants of planetary health: an Indigenous consensus perspective, Redvers et al. (2022) in their summary write,

“Indigenous Peoples have resiliently weathered continued assaults on their sovereignty and rights throughout colonialism and its continuing effects. Indigenous Peoples’ sovereignty has been strained by the increasing effects of global environmental change within their territories, including climate change and pollution, and by threats and impositions against their land and water rights. This continuing strain against sovereignty has prompted a call to action to conceptualise the determinants of planetary health from a perspective that embodied Indigenous-specific methods of knowledge gathering from around the globe. A group of Indigenous scholars, practitioners, land and water defenders, respected Elders, and knowledge-holders came together to define the determinants of planetary health from an Indigenous perspective. Three overarching levels of interconnected determinants, in addition to ten individual-level determinants, were identified as being integral to the health and sustainability of the planet, Mother Earth” (p.156).

You are invited to explore this area through articles like the one above or through the cross-listed IKE and Applied Climate Change course: IKE-2030: Indigenous Knowledge & Climate Change, whose description is as follows:

“This course brings knowledge of Canadian Indigenous communities’ relationship to the environment as valuable lessons for understanding climate vulnerability, impacts and adaptation. Students will be led by a local First Nations teacher whose valuable insights to implementing efficient uses of our land and spiritual relationships with nature can assist in addressing global sustainability“. It is taught by L’nu Elder, Historian and scholar, Dr. Patrick Augustine, who I highlighted earlier in the text.

So to conclude this introductory reflection, and to answer the question: Who are the protectors or stewards of these sacred elements? I would say that Indigenous peoples are the ones who have not only a vested interest in survival; but have been recognized globally as peoples who have traditional knowledges, many rooted in ‘science’ that are needed for Mother Earth’s survival including the human species. It is sadly ironic what has happened to First peoples, and where we are today. Now that time is running out on climate change and adaptation fixes, Indigenous peoples continue to be the most impacted by the actions or lack of action by those who have been responsible for where we are today and can rectify the long-known biodiversity and climate emergency. Let us return to the important topics in this chapter.

Topics at a Glance

• The Land, Water, Air, Fire and Relations of the L’nu
• Alfred, Venne, and Manuel
• Land Dispossession
• Systemic Racism
• Right to Self-Determination

The land, water, air, fire and relations of the L’nu

I have been fortunate enough to travel throughout Mi’kmak’i and the seven districts. One of my favourite spots is Unama’kik. Within that district one will find the spectacular Cape Breton Trail, which attracts tourists from all over the world. Isn’t it majestic (see Figure 31).

Figure 31: Unama’kik and the Cape Breton Trail, Nova Scotia

If you wish to know more about Unama’kik in relation to Indigenous Education, please visit Unama’ki College, Cape Breton University, Nova Scotia, where close to 500 Indigenous students attend. Pertinent to this chapter, I encourage you take a few moments to gather more information on Unama’ki’s Mi’kmaq voice on natural resources and the environment at Unama’ki Institute of Natural Resources.

The Oceans and the Finned

Our Elder-in-Residence, Dr. Judith Clark provided me this excellent video that brings to the forefront the issues that face our oceans and finned relations. It is a reality that we must address.

Netukulimk by Ocean School

The Air and the Winged

Lastly, I acknowledge that as a species, we must do better in relation to our air which we breath. Without air, we cannot survive nor can our majestic winged relations fly to carry our prayers to the Creator. Figure 32 captures Kitpu flying with the air, with the land, with the water on Epekwitk, Prince Edward Island.

Figure 32: Kitpu flying with the air, with the land, with the water on Epekwitk

If I haven’t already mentioned it, the Mi’kmaq word ‘Kitpu’ means Eagle in English. Kitpu is revered by Indigenous peoples not only in Epekwitk and all districts of Mi’kmak’i; but also across Turtle Island. We will now return our focus to the chapter and examining the matters of land dispossession, systemic racism, and fight for sovereignty. I believe the best way to do so is to have us discuss the readings of Alfred, Venne, and Manuel from the Whose Land is it Anyway? A Manual for Decolonization text. Below are selected quotes from each author.

Taiaiake Alfred: It’s all about the land

“Reconciling with colonialism cannot heal the wounds the colonizers have wrought on our collective existence. The essential harm of colonization is that the living relationship between our people and our land has been severed. By fraud, abuse, violence and sheer force of numbers, white society has forced us into the situation of being refugees and trespassers in our own homelands and we are prevented from maintaining the physical, spiritual and cultural relationships necessary for our continuation as nations” (p. 11).

• How do you feel about this?

Sharon Venne: Crown title : A legal lie

“In 1972, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) – which some people refer to as the World Court – issued an advisory opinion in relation to the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Western Sahara case. The Court struck down the concepts of discovery, conquest and terra nullius – lands without any people. Our nations were never discovered; we were not lost. We were not conquered. Our territories were not terra nullius – the ICJ directed that there needed to be a treaty prior to entering into their territory. British Columbia and large areas of Canada did not have treaties with the colonizers. Instead, Canada tries to manipulate the treaty process. The policies leave our nations in debt as our small underfunded communities need to borrow money to have the resources to negotiate with Canada. The irony of the whole process is not lost on our old people – “Why are we borrowing money to talk about our lands?” Then, there are the non-ending unilateral decisions by Canada while it changes the non-ending policies and directives. Canada makes no attempt to have a true treaty relationship based on trust and good faith. It is one-sided. It is also contrary to the United Nations’ directives” (p. 16).

• How do you feel about this?

Arthur Manuel: From dispossession to dependency

“…they had fenced off our lands from us and pushed us up against the river on the tiny reserve. But for my father, it was never more than a stopgap measure. He devoted his life to trying to get back our land and our right to govern ourselves.

In the immediate term, welfare cheques would play an important pacification role. It meant our people spent less time on our land and it allowed the white man to bring in all sorts of new laws forbidding us from hunting and fishing and trapping on our territories. When these measures were put in place, the Canada we see today was finally created. Indigenous peoples, from enjoying 100% of the landmass, were reduced by the settlers to a tiny patchwork of reserves that consisted of only 0.2% of the landmass of Canada, the territory of our existing reserves, with the settlers claiming 99.8% for themselves.

This is, in simple acreage, the biggest land theft in the history of mankind. This massive land dispossession and resultant dependency is not only a humiliation and an instant impoverishment, it has devastated our social, political, economic, cultural and spiritual life. We continue to pay for it every day in grinding poverty, broken social relations and too often in life-ending despair” (p. 20).

• How do you feel about this?

How do you feel about everything you’ve read, viewed and learned to this point in the course? Sadly, we have not even touched on half of the harms that you’ve yet to learn about. That being said, let us examine first land dispossession.

Land Dispossession

Initially when teaching earlier versions of this chapter, my focus was not informed by global developments around land tenure and Indigenous rights. As highlighted in the Redvers et al. (2022) article, the issue of land dispossession is a worldwide phenomena. But, in further support of the role Indigenous peoples play in terms of stewardship, aside from the Canadian and North American context, consider the following:

“80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity is currently stewarded by Indigenous Peoples. Yet, Indigenous Peoples inhabit only 22% of the Earth’s surface (Tauli-Corpuz, 2016). Indigenous Peoples manage or have tenure rights to a little more than a quarter of the world’s surface in 87 countries or politically distinct areas on all inhabited continents. It is increasingly being appreciated that recognising Indigenous Peoples’ “rights to land, benefit sharing and institutions is important to meeting local and global conservation goals” (Garnett, Burgess, Fa et al., 2018). The essential roles of Indigenous Peoples are recognised in the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol (Greiber, Moreno, Ahren, et al., 2021), a demonstration of the need for their essential leadership within conservation and sustainability spaces. However, Indigenous land tenure rights are under continued threat from governments, multinational corporations, and other interests, with violence against Indigenous environmental activists being strongly related to economic activities with high environmental impacts. Indigenous land tenure rights guarantees ownership or control of lands and resources, which ensures protection and conservation of the planet’s ecosystems. It is integral that more awareness, amplification, and actioned support for Indigenous land tenure rights occurs to better ensure a healthy planet for all” (Redvers et al., 2022, 160).

One of the authors cited in the excerpt above, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, an Indigenous leader from the Kankanaey Igorot people of the Cordillera Region in the Philippines, former Chairperson of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), and later, Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on the Rights of Indigenous peoples, gave a special lecture to my 2009 UPEI Introduction to Sociology class on Indigenous peoples, globalization and the environment. She appears in Figure 33 in the middle with my students beside her. It was by pure luck that she happened to be on campus, and made herself available to students so I planned for her come to my class to do exactly that. It is yet another occasion to have created the opportunity to meet such distinguished Indigenous leader.

Figure 33: United Nations Chairperson and Special Rapporteur, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz with UPEI students

Over the last two decades, there has been an increased awareness and resistance against land dispossession. Land dispossession is defined as “the taking or using of Indigenous land without free, prior and informed consent” (Ninomiya, M. E. M., Burns, N., Pollock, N. J., Green, N. T., Martin, J., Linton, J., … & Latta, A., 2023). Globally, Indigenous peoples have mobilized and are ‘fighting back against land seizures’; but, with a cost. According to the World Resources Institute, in 2017 “197 land and environmental defenders were killed, the bloodiest year since Global Witness began keeping records on this issue” (Velt, 2018).

It is through a global connectedness and resistance lens and knowing that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2017) is now acknowledged and accepted by most civilized countries including the ‘hold-out countries’ of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States, who initially refused to sign the UNDRIP, upon which I draw inspiration and hope.

As highlighted in the Alfred, Venne, and Manuel readings, land dispossession has been the main vehicle by which colonizing nations have come to ‘own’ the lands of the First peoples. The on-going fight for the respect and recognition of the human rights of Indigenous peoples including land access and possession is on-going, and, as we will see in the next chapter, it is a fight that will not ‘go away’. Recall in the Manuel article, ‘land theft’ and its consequential impacts of ‘dependency’ is something that one would simply forget about until it is rectified. Manuel also talked of ‘humiliation’, and the more insidious and damaging act of systemic racism.

In 2013, a television series titled the 8th Fire: Aboriginal Peoples, Canada & the Way Forward narrated by the now Province of Manitoba Premier, Wab Kinew, aired on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) television network. I continue to reference this series including Episode 3: Whose land is it anyway?. If you want clarity around the issue of land dispossession, and even solutions to this problem, this is a must watch.

To state the obvious, the fight for the respect and recognition of the human rights of Indigenous peoples including land access and possession is on-going. Nothing has been resolved to the satisfaction of Indigenous peoples. As you will see in the next chapter, it is a fight that will not ‘go away’. There is a long way to go yet. Recall in the Manuel article, ‘land theft’ and its consequential impacts of ‘dependency’ is something that one can simply forget until it is fully rectified. Manuel also talked of ‘humiliation’, and the more insidious and damaging act of systemic racism.

Systemic Racism

Systemic racism (also known as institutional racism) is defined as “a concept whereby the social structures produce inequalities based on racial discrimination. Racialized people thus face challenges due to racism from both individuals and institutions (health, education, penal system, etc.). Systemic racism is a concept different from that of individual racism” (Souissi, 2022).

Let us examine now look at systemic racism in Canada, which also highlights other races and ethnicities as well.

What systemic racism in Canada looks like (CBC, 2020)

• What did you think?
• How do you feel about this?
• Why does systemic racism still continue to this day?

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

I know that the clear majority of Canadians abhor any form of racism or discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability as outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which also describes those basic rights and freedoms that all Canadians enjoy and preserve Canada as a free and democratic county. The Charter is one part of the broader Constitution Act, 1982.

Specific to Indigenous peoples, the Charter states:

“Section 25 – Aboriginal, treaty or other rights and freedoms

25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including:

1. a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and
2. b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

The Constitution recognizes the rights of Aboriginal Peoples of Canada to protect their culture, customs, traditions and languages. The Aboriginal Peoples of Canada are also referred to as Indigenous Peoples, though constitutional provisions specifically refer to Aboriginal Peoples.

Section 25 makes it clear that other rights contained in the Charter must not interfere with the rights of Aboriginal Peoples. For example, where Indigenous Peoples are entitled to special benefits under treaties, other persons who do not enjoy those benefits cannot argue that they have been denied the right to be treated equally under section 15 of the Charter.

In addition to section 25 of the Charter, Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, Part II – Rights of the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada, states that the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada are recognized and affirmed. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that section 35 means that Indigenous rights under treaties or other laws are now protected under the Constitution Act, 1982″ (Government of Canada, 2022).

The topic of systemic racism is an area that the IKERAS Faculty explores in many courses it offers students. For now, know that systemic racism has had and continues to substantially effect Indigenous peoples in a myriad of ways including fair treatment by the justice system and equitable access to the land and waters, housing, clean drinking water, education, health care, employment, and food security, to name a few of the most pressing issues faced by Indigenous peoples.

As humans, we tend to be presented a problem, and quickly look to solutions. The ‘problem’ of Indigenous and non-Indigenous relations in Canada has been known for a long time, and can has its roots in colonialism and colonization. In 1969, the federal government’s solution to the ‘Indian problem’ came in the form of a policy document labelled the White Paper. The White Paper, with little to no widespread consultation, aimed at extinguishing all treaties, the Indian Act, and Crown fiduciary obligations to those Indigenous peoples covered by the Indian Act, was a means by which the government could eventually declare Indigenous peoples ‘assimilated’ into Canadian society, full-stop. This proposal drew a firestorm response from Indigenous leaders and communities as it was such a blatant act of systemic racism. Solutions are never simple, and we must recognize that Indigenous and non-Indigenous relations in Canada is highly complex.

We will examine how Indigenous peoples arrived at their own solutions including cultural reclamation, resistance, and activism in the next chapters. However, one over-arching solution, Indigenous sovereignty, has been discussed, debated, and considered as therein emerges principles of self-determination, self-government, and protection human rights. Yet, it too has been dismissed by some Indigenous scholars as merely a conception that continues colonial hegemony to thrive.

According to Rashwet Shrinkhal, Department of Contemporary & Tribal Customary Law, Central University of Jharkhand, India, they conclude after a comprehensive examination of Indigenous sovereignty in international law by stating,

“Sovereignty exhibits temporal relativism in terms of its meaning and scope. What it used to symbolise and what it presently stands for depends upon the political subjects who have unfold its ambit and continue to do so in defining relationships with one another; setting their political agendas; and their plans for attaining and sustaining autonomy and social justice. Thus to appreciate how sovereignty matters and for whom, historical and cultural context must be taken into account. In connection with indigenous peoples, traditional notion of sovereignty carries the unpleasant traits of colonialism. Indigenous peoples have seriously put a challenge to this archaic notion and redefined the concept from their own perspective. For them, indigenous sovereignty is linked with identity and right to self-determination. Self-determination should be understood as power of “peoples” to control their own destiny. Therefore for indigenous peoples, right to self-determination is instrumental in the protection of their human rights and struggle for self-governance. However the indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination inherently carries a gene of secessionist tendency which should be democratically neutralised to the maximum possible extent by ensuring political and social autonomy to indigenous communities and respecting their human rights” (Shrinkhal, 2021).

Let us briefly explore the ‘right to self-determination’ as this principle is most recognized as an important way forward for Indigenous peoples even though the grander solutions respecting the environment still loom large.

Right to Self-Determination

While the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), also referred to as UNDRIP, is a foundational global framework, we will spend the last portion of this chapter looking at the right to self-determination from the Canadian context.

Government of Canada Position

The Department of Justice, Government of Canada, website titled, Principles respecting the Government of Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples, presents the following as a way to introduce the Government of Canada’s stance some 50 years after the infamous White Paper,

“The Government of Canada is committed to achieving reconciliation with Indigenous peoples through a renewed, nation-to-nation, government-to-government, and Inuit-Crown relationship based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership as the foundation for transformative change.

Indigenous peoples have a special constitutional relationship with the Crown. This relationship, including existing Aboriginal and treaty rights, is recognized and affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Section 35 contains a full box of rights, and holds the promise that Indigenous nations will become partners in Confederation on the basis of a fair and just reconciliation between Indigenous peoples and the Crown.

The Government recognizes that Indigenous self-government and laws are critical to Canada’s future, and that Indigenous perspectives and rights must be incorporated in all aspects of this relationship. In doing so, we will continue the process of decolonization and hasten the end of its legacy wherever it remains in our laws and policies.

The implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples requires transformative change in the Government’s relationship with Indigenous peoples. The UN Declaration is a statement of the collective and individual rights that are necessary for the survival, dignity and well-being of Indigenous peoples around the world, and the Government must take an active role in enabling these rights to be exercised. The Government will fulfil its commitment to implementing the UN Declaration through the review of laws and policies, as well as other collaborative initiatives and actions. This approach aligns with the UN Declaration itself, which contemplates that it may be implemented by States through various measures” (Government of Canada, 2021). The principles are also presented in Figure 34.

Figure 34: Principles Canada’s Relationship with Indigenous Peoples

Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Position

You may recall in one of the earlier chapters, we looked at the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), a national governance structure overseeing strategic direction, policy development, and direct negotiations with the Government of Canada on behalf of the 600 plus First Nations in Canada. According to the AFN Rights & Justice Branch: Rights Sector, which issued an update report on the Inherent Right to Self-Government Policy Directive by the Government of Canada, they state:

“With the passage of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDA) on June 21, 2021, the Inherent Right to Self-Government (IRSG) continues to be identified as a policy that is clearly inconsistent with the UN Declaration, particularly Articles 18 and 19. This outdated and racist policy must be formally repealed by Canada. First Nations-in-Assembly have passed several resolutions rejecting the IRSG including AFN Resolution 24/2005, Review of the Federal Comprehensive Claims Policy and the Federal Inherent Right to Self-Government Policy.

First Nations-in-Assembly have long called for rights-based approaches aligned with legal and political structures and that are consistent with the full recognition of First Nations’ inherent rights, title, and jurisdiction. While First Nations have continued to express concern with Canada’s approach to self-government tables, consultation and engagements continue to be a federal priority, as evidenced by Minister of Crown Indigenous Relations (CIRNA) Minister Miller’s 2021 Mandate Letter whereby the Minister was mandated to “work with Indigenous partners and relevant Ministers to accelerate the Recognition of Indigenous Rights and Self-determination processes…”

The AFN continues to advocate that Section 5 of the UNDA commits Canada to take ‘all measures necessary’ to ensure consistency of federal laws and policy with the UN Declaration. The UNDA could be a viable mechanism to achieve immediate repeal of this policy as directed by the First Nations-in-Assembly.

The AFN will continue to support First Nations in their strategies and methods of asserting self-determination and self-governance apart from legislated or imposed colonial policy and legislated operatives. The AFN will continue to call on Canada to ensure its efforts are respectful of First Nations’ distinct approaches to asserting their inherent rights to their lands and resources. The AFN continues to action Resolution 25/2019, Support for a First Nations Led Engagement Process on Nation Building, calling for a process to replace existing rights-based policies through a First Nations-led process.

The AFN will continue to explore options to address the consequences the IRSG and develop options for the First Nations-in-Assembly to consider on how redress and compensation, such as loan-forgiveness, might finally overcome the long, dark shadow of this harmful policy. Federal commitment to supporting First Nations in the exercise of their inherent rights must also address the systemic consequences and costs of this policy and support First Nations-led alternatives that respect our rights and honours Canada’s commitments” (AFN, 2022).

So, what does all this mean?

In my scholarly, yet lay-person opinion, as this is highly principles-based and policy development related work by two parties, there is simply an impasse. Clearly, one party (Government of Canada) considers this work important, yet, they are managing the process and determining the ways forward. On the other hand, the very peoples whose ‘self-determination’ lives are at stake, and knowing that “to implement the UN Declaration means respecting First Nations’ inalienable right to our distinct self-government models free from colonially imposed policies that limit the scope and content of our sovereignty”, their position is clear, let our work guide the process and outcome.

We have covered an enormous amount on information starting from Indigenous peoples’ connection to land through to right to self-determination. These are complex matters. Let me end on a most positive note. Maybe it is not as complex as we are lead to believe. Below in this video, change is more than possible.

Mulroney gave Inuit ‘a right to self-determination,’ former Nunavut premier says | Canada Tonight

As I was putting the final touches on this chapter, the Government of Canada had a special state funeral for the former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (1984–1993), who passed away at the age of 84 on February 29, 2024. We honour such leaders as he for their contributions to public service and especially to the Inuit of the North.

Key Terms and Concepts from Chapter

• Self-directed

Important Readings / Viewings for Next Class

Laboucan-Massimo article ‘Lessons from Wesahkecahk” – A Manual for Decolonization (pp. 36-41)

Special Topics of Interest

Towards Truth: supporting First Nations truth telling and the Uluru Statement from the Heart

L’nuey Moving Towards a Better Tomorrow

Cultural Competency Supplemental Tutorials

Lunalia 2022: Mi’kmaq moon ritual – a conversation with Darlene Gijuminag

References

Redvers, N., Celidwen, Y., Schultz, C., Horn, O., Githaiga, C., Vera, M., … & Rojas, J. N. (2022). The determinants of planetary health: an Indigenous consensus perspective. The Lancet Planetary Health, 6(2), e156-e163.

Shrinkhal, R. (2021). “Indigenous sovereignty” and right to self-determination in international law: a critical appraisal. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 17(1), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180121994681