international human rights law

Canada Files Amicus Curiae Brief in 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Bad River Case

whitneygravelle

The Government of Canada submitted a brief as amicus curiae to once again ask the Court to consider “Canada’s Treaty rights” by invoking the 1977 Pipeline Transit Treaty.

As Canada states:

Canada is committed to the process of reconciliation and ensuring full protection for the rights of Indigenous peoples in Canada (despite ignoring indigenous human rights obligations in recent UN Human Rights Council report), including as recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (not seen in recent recommendations from the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples), and respects the rights and interests of Indigenous peoples in the United States, including the Band’s governance of its Reservation (while Tribal Nations on both sides of the border tell you to quit violating their rights). To this end, Canada supports cooperative and expeditious efforts to re-route Line 5 away from the Band’s Reservation.

canadas-amicus-in-partial-support-of-enb-as-to-certain-aspects-of-injunctive-relief-restrictedDownload

Line 5 Recommendations from the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues

whitneygravelle

In a Report from the Twenty-Second Session the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Economic and Social Council issued a recommendation on Line 5:

  1. The Permanent Forum calls upon Canada to re-examine its support for the
    Enbridge Line 5 oil pipeline, which jeopardizes the Great Lakes in the United States.
    The pipeline presents a real and credible threat to the treaty-protected fishing rights
    of Indigenous Peoples in the United States and Canada. The Permanent Forum
    recommends that Canada and the United States decommission Line 5.
un-permanent-forum-on-indigenous-issues-report-on-the-twenty-second-session-17-28-april-2023Download

Tribal and First Nations of the United States and Canada file Early Warning Measure and Urgent Action Procedure Request to CERD

whitneygravelle

The undersigned Tribal and First Nations submitted a petition to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to urge the Committee to examine the Government of Canada’s compliance with its obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The Convention requires Canada to prevent and rectify discriminatory practices direct and indirect – committed by Canadian corporations at home and abroad.

cerd-early-warning-and-action-request_canada_line-5Download

Previous UPR Filing – Line 5

Representatives of fifty-one Tribal and First Nations located in what is now the United States and Canada submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling on the Government of Canada to stop violating the human rights of Indigenous peoples through its support for Enbridge’s Line 5 crude oil pipeline. The groups submitted the report for consideration under Canada’s upcoming Universal Periodic Review (UPR). As a U.N. member state, Canada’s human rights record is periodically scrutinized by U.N. member States through the UPR at the Human Rights Council. Canada will be reviewed during the 44th session of the UPR Working Group, which will take place from November 6 through 17 this year, and it will be Canada’s fourth review.

2023_canada-upr_final-april-5Download

Line 5 Recommendations from the Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, José Francisco Calí Tzay regarding the situation of Indigenous Peoples in Canada

whitneygravelle

Here are the excerpts from the report for Line 5:

71. For example, Canada continues to support the operation of the Line 5 pipeline, despite the opposition of directly affected Indigenous Peoples in Canada and the United States of America. The transportation of crude oil and liquid natural gas by Canadian-owned Enbridge is creating the risk of a catastrophic oil spill that could contaminate the lands and waters of Indigenous Peoples on both sides of the border. Canada is advocating for the pipeline to continue operations, following the decision of a Parliamentary Committee that did not hear testimony from the affected Indigenous Peoples. The Government invoked the 1977 transit pipeline treaty with the United States to prolong Line 5 operations, which is inconsistent with its international commitment to prevent and mitigate the effects of climate change by phasing out fossil fuels.

Impact of business activities and climate change on Indigenous Peoples:

96. Canada should: (i) Suspend large-scale mining and other business activities in the Ring of Fire region and cease construction or operation of the Coastal GasLink, Trans Mountain and Line 5 pipelines, until the free, prior and informed consent of the Indigenous Peoples affected is secured.

report-of-the-special-rapporteur-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples-jose-francisco-cali-tzayDownload

AALS Indian Law-Related Programs (and Newsletter)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Thanks to Ezra Rosser for completing a newsletter for the AALS Indian Law Section: Indian Law Newsletter Jan 2013

The final agenda is here. The Indian-law related programs are all scheduled for Sunday.

10:30 – 12:15 AM
[6250] Section on Indian Nations and Indigenous Peoples
Cambridge, Second Floor, Hilton New Orleans Riverside
Indian Gaming and the Future of Tribal Sovereignty
Speakers: Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Michigan State University College of Law
Venus McGhee Prince, Attorney General, Poarch Band of Creek Indians, Atmore, AL
Alexander T. Skibine, University of Utah, S. J. Quinney College of Law
George Skibine, Counsel, SNR Denton, Washington, DC
Indian gaming, which came to the forefront of American Indian affairs in the 1980s and 1990s, is now a $27 billion a year business. Indian gaming dramatically restored the relative fortunes of some of the poorest tribes, and helped tribes regain control over their lands and their lives. However, with increased competition, Indian gaming revenues have leveled off and projections for the future of Indian gaming widely vary. How will Indian nations respond? Our panel includes leading legal scholars and practitioners in the Indian gaming field.
Business Meeting at Program Conclusion.

2:00 – 3:45 PM
[6425] Crosscutting Program: (A program selected after a competitive process by the AALS Committee on Special Programs for the Annual Meeting)
Grand Ballroom D, First Floor, Hilton New Orleans Riverside
Climate Change and Indigenous Peoples: The Intersection of Environmental Law, Natural Resources Development, Water Law, Energy Law, International Law, and Indigenous Law
(Papers to be published in the Tulane Environmental Law Journal)
Moderator and Speaker: Elizabeth Kronk, University of Kansas School of Law
Speakers: Randall S. Abate, Florida A&M University College of Law
Sara Bronin, University of Connecticut School of Law
Sarah A. Krakoff, University of Colorado School of Law
Judith V. Royster, The University of Tulsa College of Law
Previous AALS panels related to climate change have addressed the increasing importance of including a discussion of climate change in any law school curriculum. The purpose of the panel is to generally discuss the importance of including indigenous people in any discussion related to climate change. Particularly important is the recognition that legal “answers” to climate change may be different when indigenous people are involved. The panel will then focus on how climate change and its impact on indigenous people may be discussed in several different doctrinal areas. Specifically, each presenter will discuss the importance of this subject matter to his or her doctrinal area and include a discussion of how the topic may specifically be incorporated into lesson plans. The proposed topic is innovative in that program attendees will walk away with not only an understanding of why the topic is important but with actual lesson plans and proposed materials to include in their

4:00 – 5:45 PM
[6480] Section on Law and Anthropology
Cambridge, Second Floor, Hilton New Orleans Riverside
Human Rights, Culture, and Indigenous Development
Moderator: Kathryn Fort, Michigan State University College of Law
Speakers: Kirsten Carlson, Wayne State University Law School
Nicole B. Friederichs, Suffolk University Law School
Mark Goodale, Associate Professor, George Mason Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, Arlington, VA
Kirsty Gover, J.S.D., Programme Director, Comparative Tribal Constitutionalism Research Programme, Melbourne Law School, Carlton, Australia
The theme of this panel will be the exploration of several questions related to indigenous development, such as the following:
1.) How can human rights be used to develop a political and cultural environment in which indigenous peoples can achieve self-determination?
2.) What obstacles must be confronted as indigenous peoples use human rights law to assert their rights to resources, culture and self-governance?
3.) What strategies exist to develop the practice of intercultural education, exchange, respect and diplomacy in the field of human rights?
4.) What is the relationship between international human rights norms and processes and indigenous culture and governance?