Latest news with #CowichanFirstNation
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion: Canadians' legal rights should not depend on lineage — Indigenous or otherwise
A judge of the British Columbia Supreme Court recently found that the Cowichan First Nation holds Aboriginal title over 800 acres of government land in Richmond, B.C. But that's not all. Wherever Aboriginal title is found to exist, said the court, it is a 'prior and senior right' to fee simple title, whether public or private. That means it trumps the property you have in your house, farm or factory. If the Cowichan decision holds up on appeal, it would mean private property is not secure anywhere a claim for Aboriginal title is made in Canada. In November, a judge of the New Brunswick King's Bench suggested that where such a claim succeeds, the court may instruct the government to expropriate the private property and hand it over to the Aboriginal group. Don't dismiss these decisions as isolated or not having national implications. They are the logical extension of the Supreme Court of Canada's extensive Aboriginal jurisprudence. They are also consistent with what in recent decades have become core Canadian beliefs. Special status for Aboriginal people is deeply ingrained in Canadian culture and since 1982 enshrined in the Constitution. Aboriginal rights are widely regarded as the natural and proper order of things. In fact, they are the opposite. In a free country governed by the rule of law, Aboriginal rights should not exist. Invasion, migration and mixing is the history of humanity. The Romans invaded the British Isles in 55 B.C. and conquered the place about 100 years later, on their second try. By 500 A.D., Saxons had established themselves as the dominant power. In 1066, the Normans overthrew the Saxon kingdom. Today, British law does not have different rights for descendants of Romans, Saxons and Normans. The people are British. It wouldn't have seemed that way in 1066. When aliens force their way into a territory, the inhabitants understandably resist. They try to preserve the memory that the place belongs to them. But over centuries, things change. People mix, culturally and genetically. Descendants of inhabitants and invaders marry and procreate. Their offspring do the same. More people from other different places arrive and mix, too. Everyone born there is native to the place. The culture is neither what existed before the invasion nor what the invaders brought with them. No one alive remembers either. The culture in which they live is a distinctive derivative. Once upon a time, legal rights did depend on who your parents were. The ruler was the son of the ruler before him. If your parents were serfs, you were a serf, too. Lineage was destiny. But, like the culture, the law evolved. Eventually, everyone got the vote and the right to run for office. Everyone could own property and was free to buy and sell it. Everyone could marry whom they chose, and divorce as they saw fit. But in progressive Canada, lineage has become a constitutional imperative. Under Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution, the legally privileged group is Aboriginal, not European. Indigenous people have the same legal rights as any other Canadian citizen. But they also have rights no one else may claim. Depending on their group affiliations, they may have treaty rights. They may be entitled to tax exemptions. They may receive exclusive benefits. They may claim positions on governing bodies and in institutions reserved only for them. They may be entitled to procedures and considerations in criminal sentencing that no one else receives. Their group may be granted Aboriginal title on land from which other Canadians are excluded. This special status has not benefited most Aboriginal people. But it has enriched their elites who administer the substantial largesse that flows from government coffers. Aboriginal property is a group right controlled by Aboriginal leaders. Individual Indigenous people do not own plots of land on reserves or on lands subject to Aboriginal title. Dependency endures because governments and many Indigenous leaders are content with what has become the legal and constitutional status quo. Former Mount Royal University professor Frances Widdowson, among others, has argued that we can trace persistently poor social conditions experienced by many Indigenous people to a thriving 'Aboriginal industry.' Indigenous and non-Indigenous institutions and individuals — chiefs, leaders, consultants, managers, bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers and others — have a vested interest in the existing system of Aboriginal rights and status as special groups. Section 35, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Canada, constitutionally entrenches this system. The recent Cowichan decision is just one of its consequences. Let's say the truth out loud. The British and the French conquered the territory now known as Canada. They weren't invited, and they couldn't have been persuaded to leave. They came with numbers and technology that overwhelmed the cultures that were there at the time, many of which were in chronic conflict with their neighbours. Many people on the continent were not the first inhabitants of their territories. Treaties made with the Crown made the best of a bad situation. Lands not surrendered by treaty were no less subsumed by the new people, culture and country. Terence Corcoran: We may never recover from the lockdowns Jack Mintz: Mamdani's socialist agenda will take a bite out of the Big Apple What is most important is that none of this matters now. Generations have passed. We are all Canadian citizens mixed together. Some people have Aboriginal lineage, some have British or French, some have both, and many have none of the above. It's time to repudiate the idea that legal rights depend on lineage. Purging it from the Constitution, of course, would be no easy task, and may prove to be impossible. But the crucial first step is to reject the legitimacy of different legal status. In a free country, laws apply not to distinctive peoples, but to people, period. Bruce Pardy is senior fellow with the Fraser Institute, executive director of Rights Probe and professor of law at Queen's University.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 days ago
- Politics
- Winnipeg Free Press
‘One battle after another' for farmland in Cowichan title ruling: ex-councillor
Former Richmond, B.C., city councillor Harold Steves' family has been farming in the area since 1877, lending their name to the community of Steveston. The 88-year-old former politician only retired from council three years ago, and few can match his knowledge of the controversies surrounding Richmond's farmland — the creation of the province's agricultural land reserve, influxes of foreign-money investors, a spate of mega-mansion construction and now the Cowichan Nation's Aboriginal title claim. 'It's just one battle after another for 50 years,' laughed Steves, who still runs the family farm in Steveston, raising belted Galloway beef cattle. He said he was surprised by the ruling last week that confirmed the Cowichan claim over a swath of land on the shores of the Fraser River, encompassing holdings by the Crown, the City of Richmond, as well privately owned farms and mansions. 'We didn't expect the court case to come in and say, 'This land is yours.' We expected treaty negotiations,' said Steves. The ruling in the B.C. Supreme Court confirms Aboriginal title and fishing rights are held by the Cowichan tribes over the land next to the south arm of the Fraser, where the nation had a summer village and members fished for salmon. The ruling declares the Crown and city titles to be 'defective and invalid,' and while the same designation was not sought by the Cowichan for private titles, the ruling says that granting them had been an unjustifiable infringement on the Cowichan's Aboriginal title. B.C.'s government had a duty to negotiate the reconciliation of private ownership with the Cowichan's Aboriginal title, the ruling says. The result has prompted concerns from the B.C. government and others about the implications for private property rights, with the province pledging to appeal. But Steves is worried about the implications for precious agricultural land. He said he agreed that the ruling should be appealed, but the province should 'sit down with Cowichan and say: 'OK, we agree this is your territory. Let's negotiate a treaty.'' Steves said that if farmland hadn't been included in the title claim, 'then yes, it should be between the federal government and the Cowichan First Nation.' 'But this court decision should not include farmland at all because it puts into jeopardy all the farmland in British Columbia.' Steves' grandfather started farming on Lulu Island, which now makes up the city of Richmond, in 1877 and founded the province's first seed company. Steves, who served one term as a provincial legislator for the NDP as well as more than 50 years as a Richmond councillor, was one of the founders of the province's agricultural land reserve, a zoning designation introduced in 1973 that protects farmland from redevelopment. He has spent years advocating for its preservation and maintaining its integrity from incursions that have included the construction of massive mansions, some more than 20,000 square feet, on land for farming purposes. Steves said the Cowichan ruling brought back memories from 20 years ago when he was part of the Tsawwassen First Nation treaty negotiations. 'And on the table, we were negotiating farmland, and we actually predicted back then what's happening right now. It's scary to think about it, but that was our worry,' said Steves. He said that under those treaty negotiations, the federal government purchased hundreds of hectares of agricultural land to form part of the Tsawwassen lands. He said that at the time, there were concerns that this would 'set a precedent, because now land speculators will be buying land next to Indian reserves, or places where they think that they'll get land out of the agricultural land reserve.' Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. 'And lo and behold, along comes this (Cowichan) development,' Steves said. A lot of the private land in the Cowichan claim area was owned by 'speculators,' he said, who were also hoping to be bought out. Steves said that without treaty negotiations with First Nations, farmland could be at risk. 'I hope we will weather this one (battle), and we'll get down to negotiating proper treaties,' said Steves. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 14, 2025.
CBC
4 days ago
- Politics
- CBC
Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow on the landmark Cowichan Tribes v. Canada ruling
The Musqueam Indian Band Council says they're deeply disappointed in the outcome of a landmark Aboriginal title case that rules the Cowichan First Nation has Aboriginal title to a stretch of land in Richmond, B.C. Chief Wayne Sparrow of the Musqueam Indian Band says the ruling cuts into their own territory.
