Justice minister admits to "series of injustices"

Page 6

Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler got an earful from the chiefs-in-assembly when he showed up at an Assembly of First Nations meeting to wave the Liberal Party of Canada flag on Dec. 8, and B.C. issues were well represented.

When it was announced late on Day 2 of the special chiefs' assembly that it would be Cotler who would represent the Liberals during a candidates election forum, a lot of excitement was generated. Cotler is one of the world's leading international law scholars and has a resume that is breathtakingly diverse.

He is one of the originators of the "poverty law" movement in Canada, having founded the Pointe St. Charles Legal Aid Clinic in Montreal more than 30 years ago. He was once described by Maclean's magazine as "counsel for the oppressed."

Cotler has served as counsel to former prisoners of conscience Andrei Sakharov in the Soviet Union and Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

Cotler is currently on leave as a professor of law at McGill University, where he is director of its human rights program and chair of InterAmicus, the McGill-based International Human Rights Advocacy Centre.

With that kind of track record, many Aboriginal leaders were very excited when Prime Minister Paul Martin appointed Cotler as Justice minister in December 2003. But First Nation leaders have observed very little change in the behavior of Justice officials over the last two years and they were ready to let the minister know about it.

Cotler gave a speech, one that had very little direct electioneering in it, although the implication was that he was better equipped than other candidates to understand the First Nation point of view, and then settled in to deal with questions from the chiefs.

The line-ups at the six floor microphones began to form shortly after Cotler began his remarks and they got longer as he continued. By the time the speech was done, it was clear that a lot of chiefs, more than a dozen, had a point to make with the minister.

The complaints covered a lot of areas.

Grand Chief Doug Kelly of the First Nations Summit (British Columbia) complained to the minister that federal treaty negotiators are given "inadequate mandates" and are unable to discuss the issues that matter most to First Nations. Communities involved in the BC Treaty Process have run up a $250 million debt without being able to address their main concerns, he added.

Gull Bay Chief Wilfred King complained that the field is never level when a First Nation gets involved in a legal dispute with the department of Indian Affairs.

"You have a battery of lawyers working under you in your department. We are a small impoverished First Nation seeking justice and you are stopping us in our pursuit of justice," he said.

Proxy Ted Quewezance reminded Cotler that the government has yet to apologize for the residential schools debacle.

B.C. proxy Dave Porter called "oppression" the government policy of breaking off all negotiations when a First Nation decides it must ask a court to decide if the government is taking an illegal or unjust position; essential services sometimes are not provided when the government breaks off talks, he said.

"Is that a policy of a just government?" he asked.

Six Nations Chief Dave General employed a political prop when it was his turn to speak.

He told the minister that his government's transformative change agenda was not enough to address First Nation poverty.

"We don't need transformative 'change,'" he said, rattling a glass jar full of coins. "We need substantive bucks."

Namgis First Nation Chief Bill Cranmer (B.C.) told the minister that in 1921 and 1922, 26 of his people were sent to jail because they would not respect the Crown's ban on practicing their culture.

He suggested Canada could follow up on the residential school compensation agreement by confronting another shameful act, the potlatch prohibition.

Many other issues were aired. After hearing all the chiefs and proxies out, Cotler rose torespond. He spoke in French first and used the expression "crie de coeur" to describe what he'd heard. That phrase means, literally, "a cry from the heart."

"What I've heard this morning was really an expression of a series of injustices," he began.

He said that a joint steering committee comprised of himself, Indian Affairs Minister Andy Scott, the national chief and other chiefs was formed back in May.

"We agreed to give priority to three areas. The three areas are treaty implementation, that is the first priority, the second is land rights and the third is recognition and implementation of First Nation governments," he said. "We didn't form a joint steering committee just to engage in abstract rhetoric. We defined the priorities."

When he dealt with the matter of taking the government to court, he said, "After becoming minister of Justice, I gave instructions to all my Justice lawyers. Of course, as Justice lawyers we act for the client and the client is the department of Indian Affairs. They set the policy. We are the lawyers for that policy. But I told the department of Indian Affairs and I told my own lawyers that our approach should not be an adversarial or confrontational one. We should seek to resolve matters in a spirit of negotiation and reconciliation."

He called the residential school agreement "historic" and then dealt with the apology question.

"The reference was made, rightly so, why is there no apology as part of the agreement?" he said. "My answer to that would that be that within the context of that agreement we did not look at negotiating an apology. An apology is not something that should be negotiated. It's something that should come voluntarily, openly, freely, from the heart by the Canadian government. I hope that apology will be forthcoming freely, voluntarily, from the heart as it should be and as it deserves to be."

When he talked about the Crown defending itself against lawsuits from First Nations, he conceded that "litigation is ery often initiated out of that sense of pain [at suffering injustice] not for reasons of wanting to litigate. We will approach it in that manner of reconciliation and not litigation."

He said addressing the potlatch ban that "it appears to be something the department of Justice has been sitting on and I would appreciate more information afterwards."