Intervener Métis-Federation-of
Transcription
Intervener Métis-Federation-of
COURT FILE NO. 35945 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL) BETWEEN: HARRY DANIELS, GABRIEL DANIELS, LEAH GARDNER, TERRY JOUDREY and THE CONGRESS OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES Appellants - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN as represented by THE MINISTER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondents - and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALBERTA, NATIVE COUNCIL OF NOV A SCOTIA, NEW BRUNSWICK ABORIGINAL PEOPLES COUNCIL and THE NATIVE COUNCIL OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND (joint), METIS SETTLEMENTS GENERAL COUNCIL, TE'MEXW TREATY ASSOCIATION, METIS FEDERATION OF CANADA, ASENIWUCHE WINEW AK NATION, CHIEFS OF ONT ARIO, GIFT LAKE METIS SETTLEMENT, NATIVE ALLIANCE OF QUEBEC, ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS, ME TIS NATIONAL COUNCIL Interveners FACTUM OF THE INTERVENER ME TIS FEDERATION OF CANADA DEVLIN GAILUS WESTAWAY DEVLIN GAILUS WESTAWAY 2nd Floor, 736 Broughton Street Victoria, BC V8W lEl Christopher Devlin John Gailus Cynthia Westaway Suite 230, 55 Murray Street Ottawa, ON KIN 5M3 Email: [email protected] [email protected] cynthia@dgw law .ca Tel: Fax: 250.361.9469 250.361.9429 Counsel for the Intervener Metis Federation of Canada Cynthia Westaway Email: [email protected] Tel: Fax: 613.722 .9091 613 .722.9097 Ottawa Agent for the Intervener Metis Federation of Canada TO: THE PLAINTIFF (Appellant): Harry Daniels: Counsel Joseph Eliot Magnet Andrew K. Lokan Lindsay Scott Agent Brian A. Crane, Q.C. University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law 357 - 57 Louis Pasteur St. Ottawa ON KIN 6N5 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - I 60 Elgin St Box 466 Station D Ottawa ON KIP IC3 Telephone: (6I3) 562-5800 Ext: 33 I5 FAX: (6I3) 562-5I24 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: (613) 233-I 78I FAX: (6I3) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE PLAINTIFFS (Appellants): Gabriel Daniels, Leah Gardner, Terry Joudrey and The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples: Counsel Joseph Eliot Magnet Andrew K. Lokan Lindsay Scott University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law 357 - 57 Louis Pasteur St. Ottawa ON KIN 6N5 Telephone: (613) 562-5800 Ext: 33 I 5 FAX: (613) 562-5I24 E-mail: [email protected] Agent Brian A. Crane, Q.C. Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - I 60 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP IC3 Telephone: (613) 233-I 781 FAX: (613) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE DEFENDANTS (Respondents): Her Majesty the Queen as represented by The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Attorney General of Canada: Christopher M. Rupar Shauna K. Bedingfield Mark R. Kindrachuk, Q.C. Address Attorney General of Canada 50 O'Connor Street, Suite 500, Room 557 Ottawa ON KIA OH8 Telephone: (613) 670-6290 FAX: (613) 954-1920 E-mail: christopher.rupar@ justice.gc.ca THE INTERVENER: Attorney General of Alberta: Counsel Angela Edgington Neil Dobson Attorney General of Alberta 10th Floor 10025 - 102A A venue Edmonton AB T5J 2Z2 Telephone: (780) 427-1482 FAX: (780) 643-0852 E-mail: [email protected] Agent D. Lynne Watt Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 160 Elgin Street Suite 2600 Ottawa ON KIP IC3 Telephone: (613) 786-8695 FAX: (613) 788-3509 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Metis Settlements General Council: Counsel Garry Appelt Keltie Lambert Witten LLP 2500, 10303 Jasper Ave. Edmonton AB T5J 3N6 Telephone: (780) 428-0501 FAX: (780) 429-2559 Agent Marie-France Major Supreme Advocacy LLP 100- 340 Gilmour Street Ottawa ON K2P OR3 Telephone: (613) 695-8855 Ext: 102 FAX: (613) 695-8580 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Gift Lake Metis Settlement: Counsel Maxime Faille Paul Seaman Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600-160 Elgin Street P.O. Box 466, Station D Ottawa ON KIP 1C3 Telephone: (613) 233-1781 FAX: (613) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] Agent Guy Regimbald Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP 1C3 Telephone: (613) 786-0197 FAX: (613) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Metis National Council: Counsel Clement Chartier, Q.C. Marc Leclair Kathy L. Hodgson-Smith Metis National Council 340 MacLaren, Unit 4 Ottawa ON K2P OM6 Telephone: (613) 232-3216 FAX: (613) 232-4262 Agent Fran9ois Laroque Power Law 1103 - 130 Albert Street Ottawa ON KIP 504 Telephone: (613) 702-5560 FAX: (888) 404-2227 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Native Council of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council and Native Council of Prince Edward Island: Counsel D. Bruce Clarke Agent Jeffrey W. Beedell Burchell Hayman Parish 1801 Hollis Street, Suite 1800 Halifax NS B3J 3N4 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP 1C3 Telephone: (902) 423-6361 FAX: (902) 420-9326 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: (613) 786-0171 FAX: (613) 788-3587 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Te'mexw Treaty Association: Counsel Robert J.M. Janes Agent Guy Regimbald Janes Freedman Kyle Law Corporation 816 - 117 5 Douglas Street Victoria BC V8W 2E 1 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP 1C3 Telephone: (250) 405-3460 FAX: (250) 3 81-8567 E-mail: rjanes@ jfklaw.ca Telephone: (613) 786-0197 FAX: (613) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Aseniwuche Winewak Nation: Counsel Karey Brooks Agent Guy Regimbald Janes Freedman Kyle Law Corporation 340-1122 Mainland Street Vancouver BC V6B SLl Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KlP 1C3 Telephone: (604) 687-0S49 FAX: (604) 687-2696 E-mail: kbrooks@ jfklaw.ca Telephone: (613) 786-0197 FAX: (613) S63-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Chiefs of Ontario: Counsel David C. Nahwegahbow Agent Guy Regimbald Nahwegahbow, Corbiere Genoodmagejig S884 Rama Road Suite 109 Rama ON L3V 6H6 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KlP 1C3 Telephone: (613) 786-0197 FAX: (613) S63-9869 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: (70S) 32S-OS20 FAX: (70S) 32S- 7204 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Native Alliance of Quebec: Counsel Marc Watters Agent Guy Regimbald Gagne, Letarte, S.E.N.C. 79, boul. Rene-Levesque Est Bureau 400 Quebec QC GlR SNS Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - 160 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP 1C3 Telephone: (418) S22-7900 FAX: (418) S23-7900 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: (613) 786-0197 FAX: (613) S63-9869 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Attorney General of Saskatchewan: Counsel P. Mitch McAdam, Q.C. Agent D. Lynne Watt Attorney General for Saskatchewan 820 - I 874 Scarth St Aboriginal Law Branch Regina SK S4P 4B3 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - I 60 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP I C3 Telephone: (306) 787-7846 FAX: (306) 787-91 I I Telephone: (6 I 3) 786-8695 FAX: (6I3) 788-3509 E-mail: [email protected] THE INTERVENER: Assembly of First Nations: Counsel Stuart Wuttke Agent Guy Regimbald Assembly of First Nations I 600 - 55 Metcalfe Street Suite I600 Ottawa ON KIP 6L5 Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 2600 - I 60 Elgin Street Ottawa ON KIP IC3 Telephone: (6I3) 24I-6789 FAX: (613) 24I-5808 Telephone: (613) 786-0 I 97 FAX: (613) 563-9869 E-mail: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I - STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OVERVIEW ......................................................................... 1 PART II - QUESTIONS IN ISSUE ...................................................................................................... 1 PART Ill- STATEMENT OF ARGUMENT ......................................................................................... l International Law and Other Jurisdictions ............................................................................ 2 Canadian Law, History, and Policy ......................................................................................... 5 Purpose of Section 91(24) ......................................................................................................... 7 PART IV -SUBMISSIONS ON COSTS ............................................................................................. P ART 10 v -NATURE OF THE ORDER SOUGHT ................................................................................ 10 PART VI - TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................ 11 PART VII-STATUTES .................................................................................................................. 14 PART I-STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OVERVIEW 1. The Metis Federation of Canada (la Federation Metisse du Canada) (the "MFC") accepts the statement of facts and overview of the Appellants. PART II - QUESTIONS IN ISSUE 2. The MFC accepts the issues as stated by the Appellants 1 and will focus its submissions on the first and second questions. The MFC takes the following positions: (a) The Federal Court of Appeal en-ed by varying the First Declaration to exclude nonstatus Indians. (b) The Federal Court of Appeal en-ed by unduly nan-owmg the scope of the First Declaration in relation to Metis. PART III - STATEMENT OF ARGUMENT 3. The term "Indians" within the meaning of the expression "Indians and Lands reserved for Indians" under s. 91 (24) of the Constitution Act, 1867 should be interpreted to include all indigenous peoples of Canada. Indigeneity for the purposes of s. 91 (24) should be informed by the principles of self-determination and self-identification and should have as its focus indigenous ethnicity (i.e. "indigeneity"). 4. "Race" is not a useful concept in defining indigeneity for the purposes of s. 91 (24). Anthropologists generally accept that "all human beings are members of one species, Homo sapiens," and that "differentiating species into biologically defined 'races' has proven meaningless and unscientific as a way of explaining variation". 2 The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization stated in 1950 that "it would be better when speaking of human races to drop the tenn 'race' altogether and speak of ethnic groups." 3 The Expe1i Panel on Constitutional 1 Factum of the Appellants, at para 38 . American Anthropological Association, "Statement on ' Race' and Intelligence" (adopted December 1994). See also United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, "Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice", 27 November 1978. [Book of Authorities ("BA") Tab 16] 3 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Four Statements on the Race Question , (Paris: UNESCO, 1969) at 31 . [BA Tab 26) 2 2 Recognition of Indigenous Australians concluded that in "contemporary practice and scholarship, the dominant view among biological scientists, anthropologists and social theorists is that the concept of 'race' is socially constructed, imprecise, arbitrary and incapable of definition or demonstration. " 4 5. Although historically s. 91(24) was perceived as a race-based power, 5 the Constitution of Canada is "a living tree which, by way of progressive interpretation, accommodates and addresses the realities of modem life." 6 Any definition of Canadian indigenous peoples in the context of jurisdiction in relation to "Indians" under s. 91 (24) should be approached through the lens of indigeneity. If a person has an indigenous ancestor, self-identifies as indigenous, and is accepted by the indigenous community with which that person identifies, then he or she is ethnically indigenous and, therefore, an "Indian" for the purposes of s. 91 (24 ), regardless of status under the Indian Act. 6. Self-identification is foundational to comprehensions of indigeneity in international law and norms, as is the right of indigenous peoples to determine their own political structures and membership. Self-identification and self-determination are also principles found in Canadian jurisprudence, policy, and historical Canadian understandings of indigeneity. A broad interpretation of "Indians" to include all indigenous people of Canada is consistent with the constitutional principle that legislative power is distributed exhaustively between the federal and provincial governments under ss. 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867. International Law and Other Jurisdictions 7. Self-determination and self-identification are recognized as fundamental ptinciples in international legal conventions on indigenous rights. The International Court of Justice has acknowledged "the principle of self-determination through the free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples of the [territory in question]." 7 4 Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution: Report of the Exp ert Panel (Australia: Conunonwealth of Australia, 2012). [BA Tab 17) 5 Daniels v Canada , 2013 FC 6, at para 568 , [2013] 2 FCR 268 [Trial Decision]. [BA Tab 2] 6 Re Sam e-Sex Marriage, 2004 SCC 79 at para 22, [2004] 3 SCR 698 [Same-Sex Marriage Ref erence]. [BA Tab 11] 7 Western Sahara , Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975, [1975] ICJ Rep 68 at para 162. [BA Tab 29) 3 8. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ("UNDRIP") explicitly acknowledges indigenous peoples' right to self-determination: Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 8 Canada has endorsed UNDRIP as an aspirational document. 9 9. Under the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 ("ILO Convention"), a people's self-identification as "indigenous" or "tribal" is a "fundamental criterion" for the application of the convention. 10 10. A working group of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States ("OAS") approved a "Proposed American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" ("OAS Declaration"). Like the ILO Convention, the OAS Declaration states that "[ s]elf-identification as indigenous peoples will be a fundamental criteri[ on] for determining to whom this Declaration applies. The states shall respect the right to such self-identification as indigenous, individually or collectively, in keeping with the practices and institutions of each indigenous people." 11 11. The principles of indigenous peoples' self-identification and self-determination of governance and membership are also present in the jurisprudence and legislation of other jurisdictions such as Australia, the United States of America, and Norway. 12. Australian courts have adopted a three-part definition of indigeneity: descent, self- identification, and communal recognition. The High Court of Australia in Commonwealth v. 8 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 13 September 2007, GA Res. 611295, UNGAOR, 61 51 Sess., Supp. No. 49 Vol. III, UN Doc. A/61/49 (endorsed by Canada 12 November 2010), art 33 [ UNDRIP]. [BA Tab 27] 9 Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, "Canada's Statement of Support on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" (Ottawa: AANDC, 12 November 2010). [BA Tab 14] 10 Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention , 1989, 27 June 1989, ILC, 76 1" Sess., art I [!LO Convention]. The ILO Convention has been ratified by 22 countries, although not by Canada. [BA Tab 19] 11 Organization of American States, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Drcift of the Inter-American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, OEA/Ser.K/XVI, GT/DADIN/doc.334/08 rev. 11 , corr. I (2015) art I.2. Canada is a member of the OAS, although it has withdrawn from negotiations on the OAS Declaration. [BA Tab 22] 4 Tasmania 12 considered the definition of"Aboriginal" in the context of s. 51 (xx vi) of the Australian Constitution, which grants the power to legislate with respect to "the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws". 13 In concurring reasons, Deane J. defined "Australian Aboriginal" as follows: By "Australian Aboriginal" I mean, in accordance with what I understand to be the conventional meaning of that term, a person of Aboriginal descent, albeit mixed, who identifies himself as such and who is recognized by the Aboriginal community as an Aboriginal. 14 This three-part test for indigeneity was adopted by the majority of the High Court in Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2), 15 in reference to the identification of indigenous people holding native title: Membership of the indigenous people depends on biological descent from the indigenous people and on mutual recognition of a particular person's membership by that person and by the elders or other persons enjoying traditional authority among those people. 16 13. In the United States, the government allows "federally recognized tribes" to determine their own membership. 17 One of the criteria for an indigenous group to be acknowledged by the federal American Bureau of Indian Affairs as an "Indian Tribe" under the Procedures for Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe, 18 and thereby to become eligible for government programs and services, 19 is that the petitioning group must be a "distinct community". Evidence of being a distinct community may include social and marriage relationships between members, shared spiritual practices, and cultural patterns including language, kinship organization, and religious beliefs. 20 Thus, communal self-determination is an indicator of indigeneity in the 12 The Commonwealth ofAustralia v Tasmania , [1983] HCA 2 l , (1983) 158 CLR l [Tasmanian Dam Case]. [BA Tab 23] 13 Commonwealth ofAustralia Constitution Act I 900 (Cth), s 51 (xx vi). [BA Tab 18] 14 Tasmanian Dam Case, supra note 12 at 55 l (Deane J.). [BA Tab 23] 15 Mabo v Queensland (No . 2), [1992] HCA 23 , (1992) 175 CLR l [Mabo]. [BA Tab 21] 16 Ibid at para 83. [BA Tab 21] 17 Seigfried Wiessner, "Rights and Status oflndigenous Peoples: A Global Comparative and International Legal Analysis" (1999) 12:57 Harv Hum Rts J at 64 [Weissner]. [BA Tab 38] 18 United States of America, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Procedures for Establishing than an Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe , 25 CFR § 83.1 [Regulations]. [BA Tab 28] 19 Ibid at§ 83 .2. [BA Tab 28] 20 Ibid at§ 83.7(b). [BA Tab 28] 5 United States and a requirement for a group's eligibility to access government programs and services as an Indian tribe. 14. In Norway, the indigenous people are known as the Sami.2 1 As Norway has ratified the ILO Convention, 22 Norwegian legislation that relates to the Sarni people is founded on the principle of self-identification. In order to register as an elector under the Sarni Act, a person must self-identify as Sarni and either (a) speak Sarni as his or her domestic language, (b) have a parent, grandparent, or great-grandparent who speaks Sarni as his or her domestic language, or (c) be the child or a person who has been registered in the Sarni electoral register. 23 Race is not a factor in the determination of Sarni identity under the Sarni Act. 15. While international declarations and other domestic jurisdictions do not define indigenous ethnicity in an identical manner, three common factors recur in international law: indigenous ancestry, self-identification, and self-determination. The MFC submits that these three factors are also at the core of the meaning of "Indians" in the constitutional context of section 91 (24 ). Canadian Law, History, and Policy 16. The government of Canada has recognized indigenous peoples' right to self-determination in its policies, as well as through its respect for international law. Policies such as the "Inherent Right Policy" recognize the Aboriginal right to self-government, which is an expression of the right to self-determination. 24 Similarly, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples explicitly acknowledged the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination in its Final Report. 2s The Indian Act was amended in 1985 to allow bands to determine their own membership and establish their own membership rules. 26 21 The Sarni are also known in English by the exonyms " Lapps" or "Laplanders". International Labour Organization, "Ratifications of C 169- Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169)", (5 September 1991). [BA Tab 20) 23 The Sarni Act (NO), 1987/56, s 2-6. [BA Tab 24) 24 Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, "The Government of Canada's Approach to Implementation of Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government", (Ottawa: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, 2010). [BA Tab 15) 25 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: Restructuring the Relationship , vol 2 (Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, 1996) at 165. [BA Tab 37) 26 Indian Act, RSC, 1985, c I-5 , s 10. [BA Tab 42) 22 6 17. Historical Canadian understandings of indigeneity also support the inclusion of all ethnically-indigenous peoples under s. 91(24). The trial judge made extensive findings of facts in this regard. 27 Three other Metis examples support those findings: (a) In an 1845 Report on the Affairs of the Indians in Canada, Metis or "half-breeds" were identified as a distinct group within the broader term "Indians'', and their treatment as "Indians" depended on whether "they [were] adopted by the Tribe with which they [were] connected, and live[ d] , as Indians among them." 28 (b) The 1936 "Ewing Commission Report" defined "Metis" or "half-breed" as "a person of mixed blood, white and Indian, who live[ d] the life of the ordinary Indian, and include[ d] a non-Treaty Indian" but excluded persons of "mixed blood" who had settled down as farmers and did not need or desire public assistance. 29 (c) The Province of Alberta's 1984 report titled "Report of the MacEwan Joint Committee to Review the Metis Betterment Act and Regulations: Foundations for the Future of Alberta's Metis Settlements" defined a "Metis" person as an "an individual of aboriginal ancestry who identifies with Metis history and culture." 30 18. The principles of self-identification and self-determination of Aboriginal people as indigenous are also present in Canadian common law. 27 Trial Decision, supra note 5 at paras 183 to 525. [BA Tab 2] Canada, Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, "Report on the Affairs of the Indians in Canada" by D. Daly in Appendix to the sixth volume of the journals of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, from the 2nd day ofJune to the 28th day ofJuly, 1847, both days inclusive, and in the tenth and eleventh years of the reign of Our Sovereign Lady Queen Victoria, being the third session of the second provincial Parliament of Canada, session 1847 (Montreal: R. Campbell, 1847). [BA Tab 33) See also Canada, Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, "Report on the Affairs ofindians in Canada", by Sir C. Bagot in Appendix E.E.E. to the fourth volume of the journals of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, 28th day of November, 1844, to the 29th day of March, 1845, eighth year of the reign of Queen Victoria: being the first session of the second Provincial Parliament of Canada (Montreal: R. Campbell, 1845). [BA Tab 32] 29 Alberta, Report of the Royal Commission Appointed to Investigate the Conditions of th e Half Breed Population in Alberta , (Alberta: Department of Lands and Mines, 1936), at4 . [BA Tab 31] 30 Alberta, Report of the MacEwan Joint Committee to Review the Metis Betterment Act and Regulations: Foundations for the Future ofAlberta 's Metis Settlements (Edmonton: Alberta Municipal Affairs, 1984). [BA Tab 30] 28 7 (a) Self-identification of indigeneity is at the core of sentencing considerations for Aboriginal offenders under s. 718 .2( e) of the Criminal Code in light of the Gladue decision. 31 Courts consider an offender's self-identification as Aboriginal to be sufficient to trigger the application of Gladue, 32 although this may not necessarily result in an adjusted sentence. 33 Similarly, certain government entities 34 and government-funded organizations 35 offer services to those who self-identify as indigenous. (b) In Cunningham, this Court acknowledged the importance of self-determination in relation to membership in an indigenous community: "the courts must approach the task of reviewing membership requirements with prudence and due regard to the Metis' own conception of the distinct features of their community." 36 (c) In Powley, this Court recognized that an inquiry into Metis identity "must take into account both the value of community self-definition, and the need for the process of identification to be objectively verifiable." 37 The Court looked to self-identification, ancestral connection, and community acceptance (a reflection of the collective right to selfdetennination) as the three factors indicative of Metis identity.38 Purpose of Section 91(24) 19. The application of s. 91 (24) to all people in Canada who are ethnically indigenous is further supported by the correct understanding of the purpose and function of s. 91 (24) as a head of power under the Constitution Act, I 867. 31 R v Gladue, [1999] I SCR 688 , 171 DLR (4 1h) 385 [Gladue]. [BA Tab 6] R v Judge , 2013 ONSC 6803 at paras 20 I, 202, and 321 , [2013] OJ No 5102 [Judge]. [BA Tab 9] See also R v Corbier, 2007 ONCJ 712 at para 192, [2007] OJ No 5547 [Corbier] ; [BA Tab 5] Legal Services Society, Gladue Primer (Legal Services Society, 2011) at 7. [BA Tab 36] However, at least one court has instead applied the three Powley factors in assessing whether an individual was an "Aboriginal offender": R v JN, 2013 ONCA 251 at para 25 , [2013) OJ No 1834. [BA Tab 8] 33 R v Ipeelee, 2012 SCC 13 , at para 60, [2012] I SCR 433 . [BA Tab 7] 34 See for example, Corbier, supra note 32 at para 197 regarding eligibility policies of Corrections Services Canada. [BA Tab 5] 35 See for example, Robinson v Canada , 2010 TCC 649 at paras. 38 , 83 , and 87, [2010] T.C.J. No. 534, regarding eligibility for services from the Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. [BA Tab 13] See also Judge, supra note 32 at para 321 . [BA Tab 9] 36 Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) v Cunningham , 2011 SCC 37 at para 82, [2011] 2 S.C.R. 670 [Cunningham]. [BA Tab 1] 37 R v Powley, 2003 SCC 43 at para 29, [2003] 2 SCR 43 [Powley]. [BA Tab 10] 38 Ibid at para 30. [BA Tab 10) 32 8 20. Federal jurisdiction under s. 91 (24) is broad and limited only by the allocation of power to the provincial governments under s. 92. 39 Legislative power is fully distributed between the federal and provincial governments, such that there are no gaps: "the whole oflegislative power, whether exercised or merely potential, is distributed as between Parliament and the legislatures ... In essence, there is no topic that cannot be legislated upon, though the particulars of such legislation may be limited by, for instance, the Charter." 40 This principle of exhaustiveness is "an essential characteristic of the federal division of powers". 41 21. The exhaustive distribution of legislative power between the provincial and federal governments means that one or the other aspect of the Crown - either the provinces or the federal government - has always had the jurisdiction to legislate over the indigenous peoples of Canada. 42 The determination that indigenous people fall under the federal legislative power over "Indians" does not necessarily create any Crown obligation to that group that did not already exist. 22. This stands in contrast with the function and purpose of other constitutional provisions. For example, the recognition of rights under s. 35(1) creates corresponding duties on the government, which explains the need for limits on the scope of s. 35(1) rights: 43 Whenever a right exists, a correlative obligation can be found. As W.N. Hohfeld observed: "[A] duty is the invariable correlative of that legal relation which is most properly called a right or claim" ... "A duty or a legal obligation is that which one ought or ought not to do. 'Duty' and 'right' are correlative terms. When a right is invaded, a duty is violated." ... This is the case with Aboriginal rights in Canada. Wherever an Aboriginal right exists a correlative governmental obligation can be found. 44 23. The question of whether indigenous peoples have Aboriginal rights under s. 35(1) is therefore a separate question from the issue of legislative jurisdiction under s. 91 (24). The purpose of s. 35(1) is to recognize collective rights, which are necessarily defined by the limitations imposed by other competing rights: 39 Reference re Secession of Quebec, [ 1998) 2 SCR 217 at para 56, 161 DLR (4 1h) 385 [Quebec Reference]. [BA Tab 12] 40 Sam e-Sex Marriage Reference, supra note 6 at para 34. [BA Tab 11) 41 Ibid; [BA Tab 11) see also Trial Decision, supra note 5 at para 542. [BA Tab 2) 42 Subject to limitations such as the Charter and indigenous peoples' inherent right to self-government. 43 Powley, supra note 37 at para 29. [BA Tab 10) 44 John Borrows, " Let Obligations Be Done", Aboriginal Legal Issues: Cases, Materials & Commentary, 3rd ed., at 436-437. [BA Tab 35) 9 Establishing [the boundaries of rights] requires consideration of the guaranteed right's relationship with competing rights and sometimes leads to the necessary finding that rights come with corresponding obligations."45 24. Other examples distinct from legislative jurisdiction are the Natural Resources Transfer Agreements ("NRT As"). Those agreements were scheduled to the Constitution Act, 193 0 46 to place the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in the same position with respect to Crown lands, mines, minerals and royalties as the original provinces under s. l 09 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The NRTAs conveyed federal Crown lands within each of those three provinces, subject to any existing trusts or interests. Several pre-existing Indian treaties provided such interests to Indians for reserve lands and hunting, fishing and trapping rights to lands in what became those provinces. Given this, the NRTAs were enacted: to protect the hunting rights of the beneficiaries of Indian treaties and the Indian Act in the context of Crown land in the provinces ... The exception was that Indians, a subset of the population with a particular historical relationship to the Crown, would not thereby be deprived of certain specified hunting and fishing rights. 47 Unlike Indians who were offered treaty by the Crown in recognition of their Aboriginal rights and title, the Metis were offered scrip in part as recognition of their interest in Metis lands. As a result, the Metis did not share in the hunting and fishing rights specified for treaty Indians under the Indian treaties and similarly, do not share in the corresponding protected "Indian" rights under the NRTAs. 25. Thus, while "individual elements of the Constitution are linked to the others, and must be interpreted by reference to the structure of the Constitution as a whole",48 s. 91(24) performs a specific function and serves a different constitutional purpose than, for example, s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 or the NRTAs. The meaning of the term "Indians" under s. 91(24) is specific to the division of powers context, and can properly differ from definitions of that same term in other constitutional contexts. 45 Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bowgeoys, 2006 SCC 6 at para 147, [2006] 1 SCR 256. [BA Tab 3] See also Zechariah Chafee, "Freedom of Speech in Wartime" (19 19) 32 Harvard L Rev 932 at 957; [BA Tab 39] Isaiah Berlin, "Two Concepts of Liberty", Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969). [BA Tab 34] 46 Natural Resources Tran sf er Agreement, incorporated as Schedule (1) to the Constitution Act, 1930. [BA Tab 43] 47 R v Blais, 2003 SCC 44 at para 32, [2003] 2 SCR 236. [BA Tab 4] 48 Quebec Ref erence, supra note 39 at para 50. [BA Tab 12] 10 26. In conclusion, the MFC supports an inclusive definition of indigeneity for the purposes of s. 91(24) based on "self-identification, ancestral connection, and community acceptance". 49 This approach is consistent with international legal norms, as well as with Canadian law, policy, and historical understandings of indigeneity. If a person has an indigenous ancestor, self-identifies as an indigenous person, and is accepted by the indigenous community with which the person identifies, the MFC submits that he or she is an "Indian" for the purposes of s. 91 (24). PART IV - SUBMISSIONS ON COSTS 27. The MFC does not seek costs of this intervention. PART V-NATURE OF THE ORDER SOUGHT 28. The MFC seeks an order that it be granted leave to make oral argument for 20 minutes at the hearing of this matter. ~" Jo~s Solicitors for the Intervener, Metis Federation of Canada 49 Powley, supra at para 30. 11 PART VI-TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) v Cunningham, 2011 sec 37, r2011J 2 scR 670. Daniels v Canada, 2013 FC 6, [2013] 2 FCR 268 . Para. 18 4, 17 Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 SCR 256, 2006 sec 6. 23 R v Blais, 2003 sec 44, [2003] 2 SCR 236. 24 R v Corbier, 2007 ONCJ 712, [2007] OJ No 5547. 18 R v Gladue, [1999] 1 SCR 688, 171 DLR (4th) 385. 18 R v Ipeelee, 2012 SCC 13, [2012] 1 SCR 433. 18 R vJN, 2013 ONCA 251, [2013] OJ No 1834. 18 R vJudge, 2013 ONSC 6803, [2013] OJ No 5102. 18 R v Powley, 2003 SCC 43, [2003] 2 SCR 43. 18, 23, 27 Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, 2004 SCC 79, [2004] 3 SCR 698. 4,20 Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 SCR 217, 161 DLR (4th) 385. 20,25 Robinson v Canada, 2010 TCC 649, [2010] TCJ No 534. 18 Policy Para. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, "Canada's Statement of Support on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" (Ottawa: AANDC, 12 November 2010). 8 Aboriginal Affairs and N orthem Development, "The Government of Canada's Approach to Implementation oflnherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government", (Ottawa: AANDC, 2010). 16 International Authorities Para. American Anthropological Association, "Statement on 'Race' and Intelligence" (adopted December 1994). See also UNESCO, "Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice'', 27 November 1978. 4 Australia, Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians, Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in the Constitution: Report of the Expert Panel (Australia: Commonwealth of Australia, 2012). 4 12 Commonwealth ofAustralia Constitution Act 1900 (Cth), s 51(xxvi). 12 Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989, 27 June 1989, ILC, 76th Sess. 9 International Labour Organization, "Ratifications of C 169- Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169)", (5 September 1991). 14 Mabo v Queensland (No 2), [1992] HCA 23, (1992) 175 CLR 1. 12 Organization of American States, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Draft of the Inter-American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, OEA/Ser.K/XVI, GT/DADIN/doc.334/08 rev. 11, corr. 1 (2015). 10 The Commonwealth ofAustralia v Tasmania, [1983] HCA 21, (1983) 158 CLR 1. 12 The Sarni Act (NO), 1987/56. 14 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, "Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice", 27 November 1978. 4 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Four Statements on the Race Question, (Paris: UNESCO, 1969). 4 United Nations Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples, 13 September 2007, GA Res. 611295, UNGAOR, 61 st Sess., Supp. No. 49 Vol. III, UN Doc. A/61149 (endorsed by Canada 12 November 2010). 8 United States of America, Bureau ofindian Affairs, Procedures for Establishing than an Indian Group Exists as an Indian Tribe, 25 CFR § 83 .1. 13 Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975, [1975] ICJ Rep 68. 7 Secondary Sources and Reports Para. Alberta, Report of the MacEwan Joint Committee to Review the Metis Betterment Act and Regulations: Foundations for the Future ofAlberta's Metis Settlements (Edmonton: Alberta Municipal Affairs, 1984). 17 Alberta, Report of the Royal Commission Appointed to Investigate the Conditions of the Half-Breed Population in Alberta, (Alberta: Department of Lands and Mines, 1936). 17 Canada, Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, "Report on the Affairs of Indians in Canada'', by C. Bagot in Appendix E.E.E. to the fourth volume of the journals of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, 28th day of November, 1844, to the 29th day of March, 1845, eighth year of the reign of Queen Victoria : being the first session of the second Provincial Parliament of Canada (Montreal: R. Campbell, 1845). 18 13 Canada, Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, "Report on the Affairs of the Indians in Canada" by D. Daly in Appendix to the sixth volume of the journals of the legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada, from the 2nd day ofJune to the 28th day ofJuly, 1847, both days inclusive, and in the tenth and eleventh years of the reign of Our Sovereign lady Queen Victoria, being the third session of the second provincial Parliament of Canada, session 1847 (Montreal: R. Campbell, 1847). 18 Isaiah Berlin, "Two Concepts of Liberty", Four Essays on liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969). 23 John Borrows, "Let Obligations Be Done", Aboriginal Legal Issues: Cases, Materials & Commentary, 3rd ed., at 436-437 . 22 Legal Services Society, Gladue Primer (Legal Services Society, 2011 ). 18 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: Restructuring the Relationship, vol 2 (Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, 1996). 16 Seigfried Wiessner, "Rights and Status of Indigenous Peoples: A Global Comparative and International Legal Analysis" (1999) 12:57 Harv Hum Rts J at 64. 13 Zechariah Chafee, "Freedom of Speech in Wartime" (1919) 32 Harvard L Rev 932 at 957. 23 14 PART VII-STATUTES Statute Para. Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 91 and 92. 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 17, 19, 20,23,25,26 Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11, s. 35. 22, 23, 25 Indian Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. 1-5. 16 Natural Resources Transfer Agreement, incorporated as Schedule (1) to the Constitution Act, 1930. 24, 25