NDP BC invades sovereign Wet'suwet'en territory, RCMP arrest defenders

Putting the RCMP raid on the Wet’suwet’en in historical perspective

The recent RCMP raids of Wet’suwet’en land defenders in northwestern British Columbia have left many Canadians shocked and angered. The RCMP are justifying their operation as an enforcement of a B.C. Supreme Court injunction to clear resettlement camps and allow Coastal GasLink to carry on building a natural gas pipeline.

Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs have countered that their lands remain unceded, a fact reinforced by the Supreme Court of Canada’s 1997 Delgamuukw decision. The chiefs argue that the laws they uphold predate and override Canadian laws, including injunctions, in their territory.

Yet B.C., facing pressure from the energy company, has instructed the RCMP to enforce the injunction anyway.

quote:

History, however, proves otherwise. Far from a one-off event, the RCMP’s operation in Wet’suwet’en territory is part of an ongoing pattern of police and military units being used by governments in Canada to suppress Indigenous resistance and clear the way for continued capitalist accumulation by colonial dispossession.

As Canadians, we need to understand the RCMP’s role as a colonial paramilitary force in historical context. Canada’s first prime minister, John A. Macdonald, created the RCMP’s predecessor, the North-West Mounted Police, in 1873 to extend Canada’s colonial control of Indigenous territories in what would become Western Canada.

Inspired by similar colonial police forces in the British Empire, and in the wake of the Cypress Hills Massacre (the mass murder of Assiniboine peoples by American whisky traders on June 1, 1873), Macdonald tasked the NWMP with containing Indigenous resistance on the prairies and guarding against the possibility of American annexation of the region.

quote:

In recent decades, Canadian military and police forces have continued to play a central role in suppressing Indigenous resistance. In 1990, during the Oka conflict, Mohawks at Kanehsatà:ke endured a 78-day siege by La Sûreté du Québec and the Canadian military for opposing the expansion of a nine-hole golf course on unceded Kanien’kéha:ka territory.

Later that year, the RCMP forcibly arrested Lil’wat land defenders blocking Duffey Lake Road to protest clear-cut logging on their territory.

In 1995, the OPP shot and killed Dudley George during the Ipperwash Crisis and they carried out a 31-day siege of Secwepemc territory and arrested numerous Ts’peten land defenders during the Gustafsen Lake Standoff in B.C.

In 2013, the RCMP arrested more than 40 members of the Elsipogtog First Nation in New Brunswick for blocking a road to resist shale-gas and fracking activity on their territory.

In January 2019, the RCMP invaded Wet’suwet’en territory and arrested land defenders at the Unist’ot’en camp, just as they did on Monday.

Despite Canada’s promises to strengthen its “Nation-to-Nation” relationship with Indigenous peoples, the events in Wet’suwet’en territory confirm that Canada remains committed to its “might is right” approach.

History shows us that this is a losing strategy. Meaningful reconciliation will require Canada to switch tactics, trading armed police and military invasions for negotiation and diplomacy.

..from an email

This could be the biggest climate challenge in Canadian judicial history.

Today, two Wet’suwet’en Houses, through their Hereditary Chiefs, have launched another sweeping legal challenge to accompany last week’s judicial review of the Coastal Gas Link project. This new case puts forward the argument that Canada has a constitutional duty to protect its citizens from climate catastrophe, and draws a line against reckless fossil fuel developments that will push us past the tipping point. 

With this novel approach, Wet’suwet’en Likhts’amishyu (Fireweed) Clan’s case invokes Constitutional provisions about “peace, order and good government” as well as the equality rights of Wet’suwet’en young people and future generations under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The case specifically names Coastal Gas Link and Pacific Trails fracked gas pipelines along with LNG export facilities in Kitimat as particularly high-emitting fossil fuel projects that are likely to breach Canada’s (already inadequate) emissions targets. In the name of future generations, the legal challenge argues that Canada’s failure to do its fair share to avert a climate catastrophe would breach the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

We’re honoured to be reaching out to you on behalf of Wet’suwet’en leadership to invite your support for this historic case.

National Farmers Union in Solidarity with Wet’suwe’ten land defenders

quote:

Disturbed by the “forced removal, disproportionate use of force, harassment and intimidation” and “escalating threat of violence” against Indigenous peoples who oppose the pipeline, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in January, 2020 called for the immediate suspension of work on the Coastal GasLink pipeline until free, prior and informed consent is obtained from Indigenous peoples.

The Wet’suwe’ten have not given free, prior and informed consent to the construction of a pipeline through their lands.

The decisions directing the RCMP to enter Wet’suwe’ten territory and remove its defenders using force, and denying journalists access to witness their actions are condemned by Canadians from coast to coast to coast. In accordance with UNDRIP and our ongoing commitment to act in solidarity with Indigenous Peoples, we must inform ourselves and deepen our understanding of Indigenous sovereignty. We therefore denounce the repression of peaceful protesters, including Indigenous land protectors, and express our support for the rights of people to engage in acts of civil disobedienc e in defence of the preservation of water, air, land and wildlife for future generations.

We urge the governments of Canada and BC to uphold our commitment to the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and respect Wet’suwet’en Law by withdrawing the RCMP from Wet’suwet’en Nation and cancelling Coastal GasLink’s permits.

..short video

CN Rail Blockade by Diamond Manitoba. RCMP, CN Police and media were all on scene.

Link

Two Row Teachings on the Track

TYENDINAGA MOHAWK TERRITORY – At 10:00am on Tuesday, February 11th, three OPP liaison officers and a sheriff approached the rail shutdown on Wymans Rd. Kanenhariyo greeted the Crown agents with a Two Row wampum belt and a Silver Covenant Chain wampum belt, placed on a table on the tracks. These beaded belts symbolize treaties and agreements negotiated by the Mohawks and the Crown.

The Tyendinaga rail shutdown is now in it’s sixth day, since the pre-dawn raids on February 6th began the RCMP invasion of Wet’suwet’en territory. The Mohawks at the blockade say they will not allow any trains through their lands until the RCMP leave Wet’suwet’en territory. “We have heartfelt feelings for those people in Wet’suwet’en territory because what’s being done to them has been done to us right here.”  

Addressing the Crown agents, Kanenhariyo said, “You should be ashamed of what the RCMP are doing, of what your Prime Minister is doing, they are committing crimes against our people. What else are we supposed to do [other than stop the trains]? You people have far more power than we do but all you do is sit there and cry.”

quote:

Before moving on to the other belt on the table, Kanenhariyo wanted to make sure that everyone understood each other and how they relate to one another. “Our people understand that you are subjects of your Queen, and you are British subjects that have colonized. No matter what you say this is how we will understand our relationship because our relationship is with your Queen.”

“We have a relationship with your Sovereign,” Kanenhariyo explained, “a direct one, and the last time she was here in 2010, she came and re-affirmed that relationship with us. She brought these medals and inscribed on them she described our 500 year relationship.” He went on to say that the two links of the Silver Covenant Chain symbolize the British and the Mohawk peoples, the centre link representing their joint relationship with one another. If the silver were ever to become tarnished, either side could pull on the chain to bring the two sides back together so they could together polish the chain, thus addressing the issues that had led to the “tarnishing” of the relationship between them.

Proper process and protocol was not followed when the train tracks were originally put in. Kanenhariyo spoke of how the original Territory was marked out 5 miles deep along the shores of Lake Ontario. Later, white settlers who said they were afraid of crossing Mohawk Territory through the woods had a road put through. Then they sold plots of land along that road which would become Highway 2. The Mohawks never gave permission for any of this and have always resisted it.

The Mohawks have no desire for violence but they are concerned the OPP do not understand the stakes. “You need to send the proper people here with the proper sensitivity to understand what is occurring here and how the people feel about this place,” Kanenhariyo said. “I believe that we have a way that we can find an alternative to blood in the snow.”

The OPP offered a gift of maple syrup which Kanenhariyo declined to accept. “I don’t know that we’re in the position to receive gifts right now, you did just kind of threaten us.” He also pointed out that it was against protocol for the OPP to bring weapons to such a discussion and asked that in the future that they leave their guns behind. Despite this request the same liaison officers returned armed the next day.

“These aren’t trinkets,” Kanenhariyo implored, “this is a political matter.” Placing his hand on the belts he went on to say, “We have an obligation like you do to be bound to one another in a respectful relationship, and you have a responsibility like we do to be peaceful and sit down and polish our chain.” 

The Mohawks believe the OPP are being foolish and do not understand the true nature of their relationship to Canada and the Queen. “You can’t evict us off our lands, you don’t have the right to do that, you don’t have the authority,” Kanenhariyo said.

Kanenhariyo stressed that he is not a spokesperson nor leader despite settler societies propensity to fit everything into a hierarchy, “We are all one, there is not one above the other.”

When given the opportunity to respond, the OPP said, “We are very appreciative of the teaching today.” They agreed that the chain needed to be polished. The OPP said, “You have made your point, I think a lot of people have heard you.” The point of the blockade is not to be heard, it is not a protest or demonstration. The purpose is to disrupt Canada’s economy and free the Wet’suwet’en from oppression. The OPP Sgt. went on to say “We would like to go home and I am sure you would like to go home to your families,” to which a Mohawk woman immediately replied, “We are home, you’re on our front lawn, and you need to go home please.”

The OPP began walking away as Kanenhariyo began the closing of the Thanksgiving Address. They stopped and turned around, but continued walking away rather than listen to the rest of Address, demonstrating their ignorance of Protocol and of the fact that meetings need to be properly closed after being opened.

Concert de solidarité avec la nation Wet'suwet'en

Saturday, February 22, 2020 at 8:30 PM – 3 AM​

Cabaret Lion d'Or

1676 Ontario Est, Montreal, Quebec

Wet'suwet'en supporters blocking rail tracks in Port Coquitlam, BC. Feb 13, 2020. Photography by Jesse Winter

Anti-pipeline protestors occupy Liberal MP’s Toronto office 

Anti-pipeline protestors have taken over the office of the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, Carolyn Bennett in downtown Toronto. A large group of Climate Justice Toronto and Extinction Rebellion protestors have joined them. On their way to Bennett’s office, they chanted “How do you spell racist? RCMP” “Racist Canadian Mounted Pricks” and “You can’t drink oil; leave it in the soil.”

After taking over Bennett’s office, protestors dined on pizza and taped makeshift posters in her window that read, “RCMP back down” and “Carolyn Bennett: Will you arrest Indigenous youth?”

Outside, the protestors chanted “shut it down” in support of those who made it inside. The protest leader declared, “The bravest thing we can do here today is say that Canada is an illegitimate, violent, colonialist state.”

What will it take to resolve BC Pipeline dispute?

Mizana Gheezhik (Sen. Murray Sinclair)

The rule of law is an important consideration in this dispute. Has Canada complied with its own legal requirements? That’s a question that has largely been ignored in the issuance of injunctions in disputes such as this. Canada’s obligation to resolve this jurisdictional dispute is clear from the case law, but it has failed to do so, mainly because it has declined to negotiate. Injunctions are supposed to be issued only to those “with clean hands” and Canada would likely fail on that point.

The argument that Chiefs and Band Councils along the route, may have signed Benefit Agreements can hardly be said to be proper consent, for I have seen some of them. They do not ask for consent, so much as promise payment for silence. But even if one argues the point, the failure to recognize the traditional law of the Wetsu’wetun is a fatal flaw to that argument. Courts have recognized that traditional Chiefs have an overall say over unceded territory.

Let’s say the United States wanted to run a pipeline from Alaska to Texas and got the BC Government to sign off, through promises of jobs and financial payments. Could Canada not rightfully say: “You need our consent too”? Such is the nature of the role of traditional chiefs.

How to resolve this is the issue. It seems clear that it will take more than words and promises, for history fails Canada on that point. I am reminded of a thought I once had when analyzing the treatment of treaties by governments and in the courts. Indigenous people must feel the way that Paul Simon expressed in his song “The Boxer”:
“I am just a poor boy though my story’s seldom told
I have squandered my resistance for a pocketful of mumbles,
Such are promises,..”

I have said in the past that, if ramped up, Indigenous resistance could paralyze the economy of this country. That resistance will not respond well to court injunctions or more “pockets full of mumbles”. Positive acts of resolution will be needed. Police and military enforcement will only serve to inflame matters.

Frankly, given Canada’s intransigence, and the rising sense of injustice felt by Indigenous leadership throughout the country, I do not like where this is heading.

Mizanagheezhick

Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC) is a committee of lawyers and other human rights defenders who promote international human rights, the rule of law and the integrity of legally systems globally through advocacy, education and research. LRWC is an NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the UN.

Canada and BC violate UN “injunction” while lawful protesters arrested and threatened with armed force

12 February 2020 – While peaceful protesters are arrested from coast to coast, Canada’s Minister of Transportation Marc Garneau calls the blockades in support of Wet’suwet’en land rights defenders illegal, citing the Railway Safety Act. He fails to mention that actions of the governments of Canada and British Columbia and the use and threatened use of force by the RCMP are themselves in violation of Canada’s binding international law obligations and therefore ”illegal.” The protesters, on the other hand, are exercising their legal rights to peacefully and strongly object to serious violations of the rights of  the Wet’suwet’en.

On 13 December 2019 a United Nations (UN) treaty monitoring body called on Canada to “halt construction…of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline in the traditional and unceded lands of the Wet’suwet’en people,” “immediately cease forced eviction of…Wet’suwet’en peoples,” “guarantee that no force will be used against…Wet’suwet’en,” and ensure that “the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and associated security and policing services will be withdrawn from their traditional lands.” The UN body also called on Canada (which includes BC) to “prohibit the use of lethal weapons, notably by the [RCMP] against indigenous peoples.”

After years of Canada’s failure to comply with recommendations of the UN Committee to End Racial Discrimination regarding the rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly in BC, the Committee issued its December decision urging Canada to incorporate free, prior and informed consent into domestic legislation and seek technical advice from the UN.

Instead, Canada, while seeking a seat on the UN Security Council, is ignoring this urgent UN decision and is again directing and allowing the use of force to seize unceded traditional lands, evict Indigenous people from their lands, and deprive protesters and land defenders of their fundamental rights to liberty and to engage in peaceful protests.

Protesters across Canada are objecting to the repetition of the original colonial seizures of Indigenous lands and the accompanying trampling of indigenous people’s inherent rights to liberty, livelihood, and dignity. The grave consequences of this historic land grabbing and associated injustices persist to this day.

Now, in 2020, Canada and BC cite “the rule of law” as supporting enforcement of laws and decisions that purport to override international laws that protect the rights of both Indigenous Peoples and protesters. These international human rights laws have been binding on Canada and BC for more than half a century.

The RCMP arrests protesters and deprives them of their liberty for alleged violations of a civil injunction of the BC Supreme Court in favour of a corporation while Canada and BC violate the UN ”injunction” with impunity. These actions by Canada, BC and the RCMP are contrary to the rule of law upon which the protesters and land defenders insist.

Majority rule on issues of fundamental human rights is a fascist ideal.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Majority rule on issues of fundamental human rights is a fascist ideal.

Well, when you invoke what "the people" support...

Horgan made a very problematic statement. Sorry I do not have the source as I saw it on my phone. Essentially he said that reconciliation is hard in part due to a failure to understand and negotiate with the right people (band elected governemnts vs traditional governance) and that it is important to let Indigenous communities work things out for themselves.

The reason this is problematic is that it exposes the fundamental truth to the policy apporach. Governments should not ram projects through Indigenous land where an agreement has not been reached inside the community. Based on his own thinking, these projects should not proceed merely by getting some in the community to agree but instead should stand down until and unless the community comes to an internal agreement on the matter.

The hereditary Chiefs cannot be sidestepped just becuase the elected band councils responsible for managing social services can be pressured and blackmailed economically in a system of gross injustice whereby Indigenous communities get less support for social services and other critical needs than Canadians get elsewhere.

The elephant in the room is that Indigenous leaders cannot be bargained with at the point of a real gun or an economic one and have a result that will not be protested and unworkable. If you want projects in Indigenous communities you have to lift the economic blackmail and give them justice on all the fundamental service areas like social services, ecuation and healthcare. Then you can consult in a process of respect. Of course then you may not always get what you are looking for (without economic blackmail) but any agreement will be real and not the result of extortion.

Given what we know about the economic position of many communities, we cannot take agreement as willing consent if that agreement represents the ONLY hope of obtaining essentials fro the community. 

We all know this here but it must be connected to this discussion. The lack of economic justice for Indigenous communities is in the way of any possible consent agreements that governments or other parties might want to seek.