Metis system failed

Page 7

Dear Editor:

What has happened to our checks and balances in our nation? Elected people that are supposed to fight for our rights seem to go into hiding when the people they profess to represent challenge them for answers.

When on the campaign trail last year, I heard everyone that ran for the Metis Nation of Alberta say that they would run an open and honest government and would be accountable to the people they represent. Gee, where have I heard that before?

Right now, we have a challenge of the election sitting in our Metis judiciary council and the same people that said they would face any challenge are now being represented by high-priced lawyers, not in a court of law, but in our own Metis judiciary council. Not only can these elected officials not face the people that challenge them face-to-face in our own judicial system, they don't even have to pay for their own legal fees. All they have to do is go back to the board and make a motion to cover their costs, and we as members of this organization cover the costs for them to avoid what they promised to do in the first place and that's being accountable to us as Metis citizens.

For myself, and others who have challenged this election, we have had to absorb our own costs to have lawyers represent us. When we took this challenge to the Court of Queen's Bench back in September 2002, the judge was told by the lawyers representing the MNAA that we had our own judicial system and that we should go through that system first.

Two reasons why the Metis judiciary council of the Metis Nation of Alberta was formed: First to have a Metis to Metis face-to-face challenge without having lawyers present, which also leads to the second reason for this council's formation, and that was to cut down on legal expenses. Obviously the two main reasons for this system have failed big time.

Right now in our situation with our hearing, the Metis Nation of Alberta citizens are paying for four lawyers that represent them at three levels. First, the two elected officials that are being challenged are represented by two lawyers from the same firm. An MNAA lawyer is representing the chief electoral officer of the MNAA, and the Metis judiciary council has its own lawyer to advise it on legal ramifications and to write its verdicts in legal terms.

To top this off, all hearings are held on weekends, which also bumps up their rates to a higher level, being that they are not during the week during office times. Not only do we have those expenses, we also have six judiciary council members that represent all six zones from across the province that have all of their travel, rooms, meals and honorariums covered by the MNAA. Some come from as far as Medicine Hat, Grande Prairie and Cold Lake.

What budget do these expenses get charged from? Don't get me wrong with the judiciary council's expenses. They are legit, however, the costs of legal representation for the elected officials is not.

I feel that what is good for the elected officials should be good for us. If their legal fees are being paid for by the MNAA, so should everybody else's that have been put through this same experience that we have been put through. When these people ran, whether they were the incumbents or not, they were supposed to be running as individuals and as individuals they should have to pay their legal expenses for their own lawyers out of their own pockets. Should the board be making decisions on paying these kinds of expenses without taking it back to their community?

While other Metis provincial organizations try to raise funds for challenges, such as hunting rights, land claims and other issues that affect our nation, our leaders choose to fight their own people at the expense of our own organization. Both federal and provincial governments should be asking a lot of questions if these expenses are being paid from program dollars for these legal challenges that are personal issues affecting these individal leaders. Who really comes out the winners? Well, that's not hard to figure out. Ask the current leadership and their legal advisors.

Lyle Donald