Canada's First Nations challenge fast-track laws
The two new laws - one in the province of Ontario and one at the federal level - 'represent a clear and present danger to the Applicant First Nations' self-determination rights" and violate the government's obligation to reconcile with Indigenous peoples, according to a notice filed in Ontario Superior Court on Monday.
The nine First Nations involved in the lawsuit are located across Ontario and comprise Alderville First Nation, Apitipi Anicinapek Nation, Aroland First Nation, Attawapiskat First Nation, Fort Albany First Nation, Ginoogaming First Nation, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug, Oneida Nation of the Thames and Wabauskang First Nation.
Parliament passed the federal legislation speedily late last month. It would let the government select infrastructure and resource projects in the "national interest' and then decide whether some laws apply to them.
Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney aims for the law to fulfil a campaign promise to speed up approvals of what he calls nation-building projects, including mines and oil pipelines.
The Ontario law, passed in early June, allows the government to declare "special economic zones" that make some projects exempt from other provincial laws.
Environmentalists oppose both laws, saying they sidestep legislation meant to mitigate ecological harms while Indigenous groups argue they run roughshod over their rights to self-determination and the government's duty to consult.
The national law lets Canada 'unilaterally ram through projects without meaningful engagement with First Nations,' the court filing reads.
Canada is committed to upholding its commitments and obligations to Indigenous peoples, a spokesperson for Canada's Privy Council Office wrote in an email, adding that Carney will meet with First Nations, Inuit and Metis in coming weeks.
"Canada's goal is to pursue projects in the national interest in partnership with Indigenous Peoples," the email said. "Indigenous equity participation in major projects is a central focus of this initiative."
The Ontario government said it has begun talks with First Nations aligned with its economic development goals and will continue consultations this northern hemisphere summer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Mandela's Legacy ‘is Now Our Responsibility', Guterres Says On International Day
In his remarks, the Secretary-General celebrated the extraordinary life of the South African civil rights icon, affectionately known by his Khosa clan name, Madiba. 'He endured the brutal weight of oppression, and emerged not with a vision of vengeance and division – but of reconciliation, peace and unity,' Mr. Guterres said. 'Today, Madiba's legacy is now our responsibility. We must carry forward his commitment to peace, justice and human dignity.' To honour this legacy, the UN chief awarded the annual Nelson Mandela Prize to two individuals who reflect the late leader's commitment to peace and collective action, and this year's theme of combating poverty and inequity: Brenda Reynolds of Canada and Kennedy Odede of Kenya. Brenda Reynolds: turning pain into action Brenda Reynolds is a Saulteaux member from Fishing Lake First Nation in Canada, and as a social worker she has spent decades advancing Indigenous rights, mental health and trauma-informed care. 'There are many parallels to what we had experienced in both our countries, where the governments made impacted policies to change who we are, to face oppression, to face violations of human rights in our countries,' Ms. Reynolds said in her acceptance speech. In 1988, she supported 17 teenage girls in the first residential school sexual abuse case in Saskatchewan. 'These charges were the beginning of other disclosures that came from across Canada from survivors speaking about their sexual abuse experiences. Those charges and the disclosures became the largest class action lawsuit to date in Canada,' known as Canada's Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, she explained. Afterwards, she became a special adviser to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and developed the Indian Residential School Resolution Health Support Program – both created by the agreement – helping shape survivor support and trauma responses nationwide. Kennedy Odede: from slums to CEO After growing up in Kenya's Kibera Slum, Kennedy Odede went from living on the street to global recognition when he was named one of TIME magazine's 2024 100 Most Influential People and became a New York Times bestselling author. 'At ten years old, fleeing domestic violence, I joined the ranks of Nairobi's street children. One day I stole a mango because I was starving. A mob gathered to beat me dead, until a stranger stepped forward, paid for that mango, and in that single act of grace, showed me that kindness could interrupt cycles of violence,' Mr. Odede recounted in his acceptance speech. He began his journey as an activist by saving his meagre factory earnings to buy a soccer ball and bring his community together. 'That ball was not just for play; it was a tool for organising. A centre around which a community could form,' he said. This soon grew into Shining Hope for Communities (SHOFCO), the largest grassroots movement in Kenya he now leads as CEO. SHOFCO operates across the country, empowering local groups and delivering vital services to over 4 million people annually. 'Mandela showed all of us at SHOFCO, that leadership is not a privilege reserved for those born to power. It belongs to anyone willing to serve and look within.'
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
UN Envoy Urges Colombia To ‘Stay The Course' As Peace Faces New Strains
18 July 2025 Briefing the Security Council for the last time as head of the UN Verification Mission, Special Representative Carlos Ruiz Massieu said the peace agreement provided a roadmap for addressing the root causes of conflict. ' The Final Peace Agreement of 2016 set out the path to be followed: a holistic and comprehensive roadmap for addressing deep-rooted structural issues that have driven violence in Colombia for decades,' he told ambassadors. He cited progress in land reform, rural development, the reintegration of more than 13,000 former combatants, the start of a 'complex journey' for truth and reconciliation and opening of political space. ' Today, Colombia is a very different country from that it was in the years prior to the signing of the peace agreement,' he added, noting, however, that gaps and challenges remain. SRSG Ruiz Massieu briefs the Security Council. Violence persists Chief among these is the limited presence of civilian and military state institutions in various regions of the country where existing peace dividends remain inadequate and violence persists, including against social leaders and ex-combatants. At least 472 former fighters have been killed since 2016, four in recent weeks alone, Mr. Ruiz Massieu said, urging measures to strengthen their protection and ensure accountability. ' It is also essential to achieve effective complementarity between peacebuilding policies, security strategies and efforts to combat illicit economies,' he added. Painful moments revived Mr. Ruiz Massieu highlighted progress on opening political space, noting 'a widespread rejection of political violence', but warning that the attempted assassination of presidential candidate Miguel Uribe in June revived painful memories and underscored the need to remove violence from electoral competition. To address persistent insecurity, he urged full implementation of security guarantees alongside rural development programmes and strategies to combat illicit economies. 'Expanded and sustained state presence remains essential,' he said, stressing the need for coordinated investments in conflict-prone regions. Upcoming elections The briefing also comes as Colombia enters a sensitive period leading to elections next year. Mr. Ruiz Massieu appealed to all actors to uphold commitments for a peaceful campaign and to advance the comprehensive vision of the 2016 accord, which includes provisions for women as well as Afro-Colombian and Indigenous communities. ' In their pursuit of peace, Colombians have a deeply rooted history of resilience and persistence," he said. 'Sometimes their efforts have not yielded the expected results, but other times, thanks to patience and perseverance, they have achieved significant progress. ' Path to peace is never easy ' The path to peace is never easy, nor is it free of obstacles. But, staying the course is always worthwhile,' he concluded. ' The 2016 peace agreement is a striking example of this.' Mr. Ruiz Massieu, who has led the mission for more than six years, will soon assume duties as the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Haiti. He thanked the Council for its 'consistent and crucial' support, adding that the UN mission's role in fostering trust 'will remain as important as ever in the period ahead'.
Newsroom
3 days ago
- Newsroom
Disregard for indigenous rights comes straight from the top
Opinion: Earlier this week, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he 'fully agrees' with a letter the Minister of Regulation David Seymour wrote to Dr Albert K Barume, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Barume recently criticised New Zealand for breaching international human rights standards relating to Indigenous peoples. Among other things, Seymour's letter to Barume called these criticisms 'an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty'. This is significant, but the timeline of how we got here is a bit complex, so here's some background. A special rapporteur is a person, appointed by the UN, who has expertise in a particular area of human rights and has a responsibility to investigate, advocate for, and encourage countries to uphold those rights. First, what is a special rapporteur and how does this role relate to NZ? One high-profile special rapporteur you may have recently heard of is Francesca Albanese, who has a specific mandate relating to human rights in Palestine. Barume holds an equivalent position relating to the rights of Indigenous peoples around the world, including Māori. Barume's criticisms, contained in a letter to the New Zealand Government, reportedly addressed a range of things, all broadly related to the Government's failure to uphold both te Tiriti o Waitangi and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). We don't know all the details of the letter but the part that seems to have annoyed Seymour relates to the Regulatory Standards Bill. Alongside his comment about New Zealand's sovereignty, Seymour called the letter 'presumptive, condescending, and wholly misplaced'. Remember, there has been virtually unanimous condemnation of the Regulatory Standards Bill by te Tiriti experts, as well as by the Waitangi Tribunal. So, you can decide for yourself whether Seymour's comments are accurate. Didn't the coalition agreements say something about UNDRIP? Yes. The NZ First and Act coalition agreements with National both mention the New Zealand Government should no longer recognise UNDRIP. However, an Official Information Act request last year revealed nothing had been done about it – there was no correspondence with the UN and no express withdrawal of the government's endorsement of UNDRIP. In any case, the rights of Indigenous peoples now carry weight on their own, as they are a recognised set of norms in international law. How did the PM get involved? In comments to reporters this week, the Prime Minister said that Seymour shouldn't have sent the letter because this was Foreign Minister Winston Peters' job. But while initially appearing to criticise Seymour for not following the right process, Luxon then said he 'completely agrees' with Seymour's letter to Barume. He called Barume's letter 'bunkum' and said the special rapporteur's comments were 'completely without substance'. Remember that Barume is appointed as a world-leading expert on these matters, so again, you decide who might be right here. To summarise so far, Seymour – in his capacity as the Minister of Regulation – wrote to a UN official criticising him for criticising New Zealand for breaching Indigenous peoples' rights, and then the Prime Minister publicly agreed with Seymour's comments. Indigenous rights scholar Tina Ngata has pointed out the message from New Zealand that we reject Indigenous peoples' rights therefore isn't a matter of Seymour going rogue. It is a message that comes straight from the top. This matters and is something we should all be embarrassed about. How did the UN find out about this so quickly? This week, an annual meeting was held at the UN by a group called the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (known as EMRIP). On the same day Luxon made his comments, New Zealand had its speaking slot at EMRIP. The Prime Minister's comments were reported by members of the New Zealand delegation to the group, such as Auckland University professor Claire Charters (members are independent, not part of the government). So, the UN, and therefore the rest of the world, heard about it the same day it happened (credit again to Tina Ngata for highlighting this). What's the bigger picture here and what happens next? As much as this might seem like just an egg on your face moment for the government, the broader implications are pretty serious. We all know by now about this Government's willingness to repeatedly disregard its Treaty obligations here at home, with the Waitangi Tribunal conducting an unprecedented number of urgent inquiries in 2024, all of which found breaches of te Tiriti and its principles. But this is bigger. The statement made by Seymour, and later endorsed by the Prime Minister, that the letter from the special rapporteur 'is an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty' will weaken our standing internationally when it comes to human rights. This is because the affront to sovereignty line is one wheeled out any time a country commits human rights abuses and gets told off. Israel and the US, for example, are currently using it in response to Francesca Albanese's criticisms of human rights abuses in Palestine. So, when New Zealand says the same thing, we undermine any moral authority we might have had to call out other countries over other things. This is one of the things Claire Charters pointed out this week when she spoke to EMRIP. It's bigger than just te Tiriti. We'll probably hear more about this in the next few weeks, but sadly it may not persuade the Government to do anything differently. We have seen over and over this term how willing the coalition is to disregard Māori rights. The only difference is that this time it has happened on a global stage.
