What involvement if any has Nisga’a Nation had in any of the ‘Idle No More’ protests that have been going on across the country?

Nisga‚Äôa Lisims Government has not directly participated in the protests; we are not affected by the federal  government‚Äôs amendments to the Indian Act because our rights are constitutionally protected by our Treaty, the Nisga‚Äôa Final Agreement. 

However, like many other First Nations across Canada, Nisga’a Nation is concerned with the current federal policy to attempt to erode aboriginal and Treaty rights.

Do you support the protests that have been going on across the country?

In general, we believe that First Nations have the right to engage the federal government through peaceful democratic protest to bring attention to their concerns. 

Right now, one of our main concerns is the current federal policy to attempt to erode aboriginal and Treaty rights, and we have been attempting to bring attention this concern for quite some time.

Do you have a position on the proposed federal legislation?

The rights and interests of Nisga‚Äôa Nation are not affected by the proposed Indian Act amendment legislation. 

However, we are concerned about the federal government’s attempt to erode aboriginal and Treaty rights through various legislative techniques authored by the Department of Justice.

One example can be found in the proposed Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act.  For the first time, this new law would include an actual derogation clause ‚Äì the proposed law explicitly states that aboriginal and Treaty rights deemed to be in conflict with the law‚Äôs stated objectives will not be respected. 

Moreover, more recent federal laws have been developed without the required consultation with those affected.  There has been no respect for the ‚Äúfree, prior and informed consent‚Äù test that has been embedded in the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a universally accepted human rights declaration that the federal government now claims to endorse.

Equally disturbing is the technique adopted in the new law that allows future erosion of Aboriginal and Treaty rights by regulations.

Regulation writing is, of course, carried out by Department of Justice officials.  Unlike the case with new statutory proposals, which must go through three readings and committee review at House of Commons and Senate stages, Parliament has virtually no say with respect to new regulations.

Canada's highest court has affirmed that the respect and protection of existing Aboriginal and Treaty rights is an underlying constitutional principle and value.  Given Canada‚Äôs colonial history towards Aboriginal peoples, the responsibility of Parliament is particularly important in safeguarding the rights and interests and dignity of Aboriginal peoples, and the reliability and durability of their fundamental rights.

It would be a sad day for Canadian democracy if Parliament compromises its duty to respect underlying constitutional principles and values, and safeguard collective and individual rights. Parliament must not surrender its responsibility to Department of Justice officials.

What is the position of Nisga’a Nation on these federal initiatives?

Our concern is that these practices are inconsistent with the public trust that the federal government holds.   In law, the authority of a government is considered to be in the nature of a public trust, in the sense that the government possesses powers in order that it may use them at all times for the public good.

This public trust is vested generally in the government, and particularly in the executive arm of government, which plays the most active role in carrying out government policies.