Tag

Indigenous rights

2 articles

AccountabilityMay 27, 20268 min read
When Quebec Tried to Leave Canada, the Crees Voted First. The Alberta Equivalent Is Already Underway.
In the lead-up to the October 30, 1995 Quebec sovereignty referendum, the Grand Council of the Crees of Eeyou Istchee (northern Quebec) and the Inuit of Nunavik (the Arctic-coast region of Quebec) each held their own referendums on whether they would consent to be included in a sovereign Quebec. Both produced overwhelming "No" results — the Crees at 96.3% with 77% turnout, the Inuit at approximately 96%. Grand Chief Matthew Coon Come published the legal paper "Sovereign Injustice" arguing that Indigenous self-determination under international law gave the Crees the right to remain in Canada regardless of the broader Quebec vote. The 1995 sovereignty referendum failed narrowly (No 50.58%, Yes 49.42%); the Supreme Court of Canada's 1998 Reference re Secession of Quebec subsequently established that any future provincial secession would require negotiation with multiple stakeholders including Indigenous nations. In 2025-2026, as a citizen petition pushes the Alberta government toward a referendum on provincial independence, the Confederacy of Treaty 6 First Nations, the Blackfoot Confederacy (Treaty 7), and Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta have all publicly opposed the independence movement on identical legal grounds: treaties signed with the Crown predate the existence of the province of Alberta itself (1905), and the province has no jurisdiction to alter those agreements. Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation has filed for a court injunction to block the referendum question; Treaty 6 chiefs raised the matter with King Charles III at Buckingham Palace in May 2026. The legal architecture is now stronger than it was in 1995 — the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act became federal law in 2021. The political dynamic is the same: a provincial separatist government dismissing treaty-nation opposition. This article walks both cases in detail, the legal precedents that link them, and what an Indigenous-treaty pathway out of a provincial referendum actually looks like.
AccountabilityMay 24, 20269 min read
Canada Has Granted Surveillance Powers Like Bill C-22 Before. Here Is How They Were Used.
Bill C-22's defenders argue that the bill's safeguards and stated use cases will prevent the new surveillance powers from being misused. The argument is not new. Canadians have heard versions of it before every previous expansion of federal surveillance authority, from the 1939 establishment of the RCMP Security Service through the 2015 Anti-Terrorism Act. The declassified historical record — through Access to Information releases, court orders obtained by the BC Civil Liberties Association, CBC News investigations, and the formal findings of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls inquiry — shows what was actually done with those powers, after the safeguards were in place. The RCMP surveilled Tommy Douglas (the founder of Medicare) for over 30 years. CSIS told police that Indigenous land defenders at Ipperwash were armed in 1995, a claim that turned out to be false, three days before an OPP officer shot Dudley George. CSIS surveilled peaceful Northern Gateway pipeline opponents and shared intelligence back to Enbridge — the company being protested. This article walks the documented record. It does not claim Bill C-22 will be used in any of these ways; it shows what HAS happened when similar latitude was granted.

When Quebec Tried to Leave Canada, the Crees Voted First. The Alberta Equivalent Is Already Underway.

In the lead-up to the October 30, 1995 Quebec sovereignty referendum, the Grand Council of the Crees of Eeyou Istchee (northern Quebec) and the Inuit of Nunavik (the Arctic-coast region of Quebec) each held their own referendums on whether they would consent to be included in a sovereign Quebec. Both produced overwhelming "No" results — the Crees at 96.3% with 77% turnout, the Inuit at approximately 96%. Grand Chief Matthew Coon Come published the legal paper "Sovereign Injustice" arguing that Indigenous self-determination under international law gave the Crees the right to remain in Canada regardless of the broader Quebec vote. The 1995 sovereignty referendum failed narrowly (No 50.58%, Yes 49.42%); the Supreme Court of Canada's 1998 Reference re Secession of Quebec subsequently established that any future provincial secession would require negotiation with multiple stakeholders including Indigenous nations. In 2025-2026, as a citizen petition pushes the Alberta government toward a referendum on provincial independence, the Confederacy of Treaty 6 First Nations, the Blackfoot Confederacy (Treaty 7), and Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta have all publicly opposed the independence movement on identical legal grounds: treaties signed with the Crown predate the existence of the province of Alberta itself (1905), and the province has no jurisdiction to alter those agreements. Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation has filed for a court injunction to block the referendum question; Treaty 6 chiefs raised the matter with King Charles III at Buckingham Palace in May 2026. The legal architecture is now stronger than it was in 1995 — the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act became federal law in 2021. The political dynamic is the same: a provincial separatist government dismissing treaty-nation opposition. This article walks both cases in detail, the legal precedents that link them, and what an Indigenous-treaty pathway out of a provincial referendum actually looks like.

Canada Has Granted Surveillance Powers Like Bill C-22 Before. Here Is How They Were Used.

Bill C-22's defenders argue that the bill's safeguards and stated use cases will prevent the new surveillance powers from being misused. The argument is not new. Canadians have heard versions of it before every previous expansion of federal surveillance authority, from the 1939 establishment of the RCMP Security Service through the 2015 Anti-Terrorism Act. The declassified historical record — through Access to Information releases, court orders obtained by the BC Civil Liberties Association, CBC News investigations, and the formal findings of the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls inquiry — shows what was actually done with those powers, after the safeguards were in place. The RCMP surveilled Tommy Douglas (the founder of Medicare) for over 30 years. CSIS told police that Indigenous land defenders at Ipperwash were armed in 1995, a claim that turned out to be false, three days before an OPP officer shot Dudley George. CSIS surveilled peaceful Northern Gateway pipeline opponents and shared intelligence back to Enbridge — the company being protested. This article walks the documented record. It does not claim Bill C-22 will be used in any of these ways; it shows what HAS happened when similar latitude was granted.