Image credit: Isaac Murdoch
To download click HERE
To download in French click HERE
To download click HERE
View this post on Instagram

❗️Update on 1492 Land Back Lane❗️ Since the 19th of July Haudenosaunee land defenders have been defending traditional land at the Mackenzie Meadows development site in so-called Caledonia, Ontario (1492 Land Back Lane). On the 5th of August, with the goal of disbanding the encampment, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) served an injunction and violently raided the occupation. The OPP shot rubber bullets at peaceful demonstrators and 9 people were arrested. Following this, on the 25th of August, Superior Court Justice John Harper ruled that the injunction served earlier that month would continue, despite the fact that all blockades had come down.On the 2nd of September, journalist Karl Dockstader was arrested and charged by the OPP for his coverage on the reclamation camp and blockades. OPP Constable Rodney LeClair now estimates that the police have made 17 arrests in connection to 1492 Land Back Lane. Defenders on the site expect another police raid to happen in the coming days. Mention blockades We urge you to use the email generator in @climatestrikecanada bio to demand that elected officials meet with 6 Nations Land Defenders. Please consider donating funds to landback6nations@gmail.com or https://www.gofundme.com/f/legal-fund-1492-land-back-lane to continue to support the land defenders at 1492 Land Back Lane. Sources: aptnnews.ca (@aptnnews) #landbacklane #landback #landdefenders

A post shared by Fridays for Future Toronto (@fridaysforfutureto) on

View this post on Instagram

Reminder that the forced removal of our people happened AFTER “BC” implemented UNDRIP legislation. There are currently still over 30 articles of UNDRIP being violated in our territories. • • #Repost @raven_trust • • • • • • • The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was adopted by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, 13 years ago today. A full 25 years after the writing process began. For Dene National Chief Norman Yakeleya, UNDRIP confirmed something Canadian governments have been denying for more than a century. "We had 153 years of denial of rights," he said. "So we're coming from a period of denial to a period of recognizing that the Aboriginal people … had a way of life." @cbc. For nearly a decade, Canada refused to endorse UNDRIP. Canada, was one of four in the world to hold back — 144 other nations accepted it. It then changed its stance in 2010. BC adopted UNDRIP as provincial law in October 2019 and is working on implementation with the recent passing of Bill 41. UNDRIP consists of 46 articles, recognizing the basic human rights of Indigenous people along with their rights to self-determination. The declaration includes articles affirming the right of Indigenous people to create their own education systems, receive restitution for stolen lands, and participate in all decision-making that affects their interests. It was drafted by Indigenous peoples from around the world and covering widely different national circumstances. @unitednations. * On this anniversary, let us think about how we can support reconciliation and true implementation of UNDRIP. Indigenous people's throughout Canada are exerting their legal rights to protect their lands, air, water and culture from extractive industries. RAVEN raises funds to support these cases so that Indigenous communities don't have to empty their resources to fund these often expensive legal challenges. Donate to any one of our campaigns today to help offset these costs with the LINK IN @raven_trust BIO! #undrip #indigenouslaw #legalrights #landback #indigenousrights

A post shared by @ wetsuweten_checkpoint on

View this post on Instagram

From Kate Gunn at First People's Law: "An injunction is an order granted by a court restraining someone from commencing or continuing an activity on a permanent or temporary basis pending the outcome of a legal proceeding. Since the entrenchment of protections for Aboriginal and Treaty rights in the Constitution Act, 1982, Indigenous people in Canada have used injunctions to protect their ancestral lands from exploitation. In recent years, however, court decisions have followed a trajectory which directly undermines the protection of #Indigenous rights. On the one hand, courts are increasingly reluctant to grant injunctions to Indigenous groups where the result would be to halt or delay a proposed project. At the same time, companies now frequently obtain injunctions to prevent Indigenous people from erecting blockades, interfering with project activities or exercising other remedies intended to protect and preserve their lands. Indigenous people have used injunctions to protect their lands since at least 1985, however, the Supreme Court has also acknowledged the challenges associated with using injunctions to protect Indigenous lands while development-related disputes are heard by the courts. The trends in injunction decisions highlight key issues in the unsettled relationship between Canadian law, Indigenous rights and resource development." ****** RAVEN has backed injunctions by Tsilhqot'in Nation that stopped Taseko Mines from road building and drilling in their territory. These actions helped to protect the territory until the ultimate cancellation of the New Prosperity open pit gold mine at sacred Teztan Biny (Fish Lake). RAVEN exists to right the imbalance and level the playing field. We crowdfund for legal defence funds so that Nations don’t have to drain their community coffers to pursue injunctions when corporations or governments disrespect treaty rights or Indigenous law. Consider becoming a monthly donor and be part of a movement supporting Indigenous rights and environmental justice. Visit raventrust.com or LINK IN BIO!

A post shared by RAVEN Trust (@raven_trust) on

View this post on Instagram

I watched video after video of commercial fishermen destroying the property of #Mikmaq fishermen. The rcmp stood by and watched. A boat and van were both burned. Paint thinner was poured over lobster crates. Boards with nails in them were laid down (to pop tires). The rcmp stood by and allowed it all to happen. • • We have seen countless people arrested in relation to #1492LandBackLane - reporters, mothers who were bringing food out to them, and people who were just on their own territories. • • We have heard of the calls for assistance for the Algonquin #MooseMoratorium - with hunters sneaking in from other areas, saying they won’t be stopped. • • The Secwepemc @kanahus.tattoos have faced ongoing police harassment for asserting their right to say no to TransMountain - which is about to destroy riverways & run bitumen through their unceded territories. • • We, the Wet’suwet’en have the rcmp escorting in coastal Gaslink workers - even though our chiefs have continually asserted that there will be no pipelines in our territories. The test drilling that is happening will jeopardize everything downstream from us. We are seeing mass destruction and a huge influx of transient workers - putting our women, girls, and 2 spirit community members at risk. • • We need to all stand together... all allies need to step to the front & let the colonial government know that these infringements on inherent Indigenous rights are not acceptable. • • When people say “what can we do?”... well, we have seen that the most effective actions have been direct actions. Letter writing & campaigns have not been working... we need feet in the street, and all hands on deck. • • The colonial government will allow these violations of rights to continue to occur until enough noise is made. • • We need to all stand together. We need to stand with ALL Nations & communities that are under attack right now. Plot. Plan. Strategize. Organize. Mobilize. • • #IndigenousSolidarity

A post shared by @ wetsuweten_checkpoint on

View this post on Instagram

With all the actions surrounding #Wetsuweten across the country over the past few months, some of you might be wondering about the Delgamuukw case and why it's relevant to these actions. We’re here to break it down for you □□‍□. * The Delgamuukw case is also known as Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, and is named after Earl Muldoe Delgamuukw, a Gitxsan man who was involved in the case. In response to unauthorized clear cut logging in their territory, in 1984 Hereditary Chiefs of Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan Nations took to the courts to have their title to more than 58,000 sq km of land in Northern BC recognized by the Canadian courts. The trial began in 1987. BC became a part of #Canada in 1871, and the Supreme Court ruled that all rights to their lands were legally extinguished when this happened. Gitxsan and Wet’suwet’en elders testified using oral histories in their languages, and the court found that Aboriginal title couldn't be extinguished and confirmed that oral testimony is a legitimate form of evidence. The Delgamuukw case is an important one in #Canadian law because it set precedent of how #Aboriginal title could be understood in courts. From the decision: 1) Aboriginal title is a communal right: decisions about land must be made by the community as a whole. 2) Because aboriginal title is based on a First Nation’s relationship with the land, these lands cannot be used in a way that would destroy their cultural relationship to the land. 3) Aboriginal title is a constitutional right. No government can unduly interfere with aboriginal title. After the case, other First Nations, most notably the Tsilhqot’in Nation in 2014, used the Delgamuukw decision in their own land claims cases. Why is the case relevant to the Wet'suwet'en solidarity actions? In the #Delgamuukw case, Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chiefs established that they have a law that predates the days of the elected band councils enacted under the Indian Act. Under Wet'suwet'en law, the Hereditary Chiefs are responsible for decisions regarding the land. Approving a pipeline in their ancestral lands without consent is an infringement of their Aboriginal title and rights. @cdnencyclopedia @cbc

A post shared by RAVEN Trust (@raven_trust) on

View this post on Instagram

Today is #CanadaParksDay, and beneath the feel-good evocation of camping trips and pristine "wilderness", another discussion is taking place about the nature of Canadian parks and the responsibility of authorities to reconcile with a tarnished past. When Canada created its national parks system in 1885, it forced out Indigenous peoples in the name of #conservation and tourism. Banff National Park - created in 1887- is celebrated as a Canadian treasure. "What you will not find within Canada’s oldest national park, is much trace of the Indigenous people whose ancestors resided there.Authorities viewed the Stoney Nation as “stragglers,” best confined to the neighbouring reserves." They were not alone in being banished for parkland. "In 1936, the Keeseekoowenin Ojibwa band were expelled from a fishing station within Riding Mountain National Park in Manitoba. Provincially, Ontario banned all hunting in Algonquin Park, and Quebec did the same in the Parc des Laurentides in the late 19th century. Around the same time, First Nations were removed for the creation of Vancouver’s Stanley Park." Today nearly 90% of parks are managed in accordance with treaties or agreement with Indigenous peoples. In the Gulf Islands Reserve in BC, @parks.canada work with the Coast Salish peoples to re-introduce the traditional practice of building rock walls at the low tide mark to trap sand and create “clam gardens.” Eli Enns of Nuu-chah-nulth First Nation, said his people’s experience with the Pacific Rim National Park Reserve reveals a vision of the future and a “tremendous” improvement over the past. In 2004, Parliament passed legislation to return land from Pacific Rim and Riding Mountain parks to Indigenous peoples. The 86 hectares is now a residential community powered by geothermal energy for the Tla-o-qui-aht First Nations. However, Parks Canada didn't draw attention to the historic exclusions of Indigenous peoples for #Canada150. "These places have been wound up in a sense of Canadian nationalism and identity. They are trotted out as symbols of Canada, yet they have this history that tells about another side — one of colonialism and dispossession.” @nationalpost @vice

A post shared by RAVEN Trust (@raven_trust) on

View this post on Instagram

Violence against the land begets violence against women. Research, testimonies and community members have made this crucial connection. Notably, Amnesty International reported: “Oil and gas extraction, coal mining, and hydroelectric development help fuel the provincial economy and create high paying jobs that attract workers from across the country. In actively promoting intensive development in the northeast, federal and provincial officials have emphasized these benefits, while largely ignoring serious—unintended consequences for wellness and safety that disproportionately impact the lives of the Indigenous peoples who live there, particularly Indigenous women and girls. Government statistics show that Indigenous women and girls across Canada face much higher rates of violence than all other women and girls. Accounts from women and frontline service providers in northeast BC suggest that, if anything, the threats to the safety of Indigenous women and girls are even more acute in this region. For many Indigenous women and girls in the northeast, domestic violence, violence in the workplace, and violence at the hands of social acquaintances and strangers, is so pervasive it has become normalized. Amnesty International believes that failure to adequately address the unintended social impacts of resource development contributes to the risks faced by Indigenous women and girls.” * The Wet’suwet’en recently launched a legal challenge, supported by all the Hereditary Chiefs acting in unity, which seeks a Judicial Review of a project extension for CGL’s pipeline, granted by the BC Environmental Assessment Office in October 2019. The action argues that the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office had a duty to assess new evidence of the project’s harms, which in this case means the recent findings of the Inquiry on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, which found direct links between extractive industries, “man camps” and increased violence against Indigenous women. The BCEAO was also required to take into account CGL’s record of non-compliance (over 50 instances!). Pledge your support to Wet'suwet'en with the LINK IN BIO!

A post shared by RAVEN Trust (@raven_trust) on

View this post on Instagram

#Repost @raven_trust with @Rep0stApp • • • • • • • Actions in support of Wet'suwet'en across the country have prompted questions about the difference between the Chiefs and elected band councils. * The Hereditary chiefs represent different houses that make up the Nation, and their titles are passed down and predate colonization. “The hereditary chiefs draw their authority from Wet'suwet'en law, so their law is the law that pre-exists colonization in the territory,” says Kim Stanton, lawyer specializing in Indigenous law. * In 1997, the Wet’suwet’en people were part of Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, which ultimately upheld #Indigenous peoples’ claims to land that had never been ceded through a treaty, which includes Wet’suwet’en Nation and much of BC. “The Hereditary Chiefs tried for decades to have their title recognized and tried using the Canadian legal system, and the Canadian legal system failed them. It’s not surprising that they would now be in a situation where they're having to defend their ancestral territory.” * On the other hand, elected band councils are elected members of the community. These councils were the result of the Indian Act, which was first established in 1876 and defined how the Canadian government interacts with Indigenous people. They were formed to impose a leadership structure that resembled Canada’s system of governance. “They don’t have the authority under the Indian Act to make decisions on traditional territory,” says Pam Palmater. Stanton adds that much of BC was never ceded to colonization and "the Indian Act jurisdiction has been imposed upon them without them having actually ceded their land, so it's actually illegitimate." * What happens next? Chief Perry Bellegarde of the Assembly of First Nations believes it’s best if the Wet'suwet'en are left to resolve their differences on their own. He also adds "In the ancestral territory lands of the Wet'suwet'en peoples, it’s the Hereditary Chiefs and their clans and houses that have the jurisdiction. So when CGL and governments come in, they didn’t bring the #Wetsuweten Nation and the proper people in place to deal with their ancestral lands.” #wetsuwetenstrong

A post shared by @ wetsuweten_checkpoint on

Inquiries can be directed to jodie.williams@dpcdsb.org
Proudly powered by Weebly