Alberta court case a landmark in claims

Page 3

The outcome of a court case involving four bands in Alberta may have serious ramifications for Natives across Canada.

The Ermineskin, Montana, Louis Bull and Samson Bands are seeking a declaration from Ottawa to the effect that, under the 1870 Rupert's Land Order, the federal government honor a promise to protect "the interests and well-being" of Natives. A resolution of that statement could mean compensation for lost resources and lands which span almost the entire region of Canada.

Rupert's Land comprises all lands in Canada whose rivers drain into Hudson's Bay. Jurisdiction of the land was transferred from the Hudson's Bay Company to the federal government in 1870.

The Rupert's Land Order returned control of the region to Ottawa and specified that the federal government was responsible for the Indians living there, said Gordon Lee, Ermineskin Band councillor.

"What happened back when the land transfer took place, when Canada took over Rupert's Land, was a resolution was passed in the (British) House of Lords to look after the interests and well-being of the Indians in Rupert's Land.

"That is a matter that has never really been looked at. The words "interests and well-being" covers a lot. There's quite an area of matters concerning our lives."

The bands hope the case will set a precedent that could lead to adequate compensation, for lost lands and resources, said Louis Bull councillor Jonathan Bull. Such a precedent might also be used as a legal level in establishing self-government for the bands.

"I don't know what benefits we'll get," he said. "It's a matter of setting a precedent. The only thing that will come out of it is the fact that the government did wrong taking all this land away."

Federal Court Justice Strayer heard arguments from the bands' lawyer, Thomas Berger, and Crown lawyers the third week of September in Calgary over the admissibility of certain historical documents as evidence. That decision was still pending at the time of publication.

The second part of the case, which will deal with the constitutional impact of the Rupert's Land Order, is scheduled to proceed December 14.