 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
As an urban first nation, Musqueam lands
and resources have always been coveted by others. We look around today,
and see that over the last 130 years they have largely been taken by
government, without proper compensation, and given to others. While
other First Nations in the Province have been subjected to much the
same experience, the intensity of the dispossession effort directed
at Musqueam lands and resources perhaps explains why Musqueam was one
of the first to challenge the government in court. When Musqueam reserves (1)
were initially set aside, government officials justified our small reserve
allocation (the smallest of any BC First Nation) on the basis that Musqueam
did not need much land because we sustained ourselves by fishing. But
later, when the commercial fishery developed in response to advances
in canning technology, the government through the Department of Fisheries
treated our fishing as a threat to “conservation”and it too
was curtailed. While we had fished for trade and supplied settlers and
the Hudson’s Bay trading post at Fort Langley, once the fishery
became commercially valuable, government restricted us to a food fishery
and reallocated our resource to the commercial industry, and more recently,
the sports fishery. So, first our lands were taken on the basis that
we would still have our fishery, and then they took our salmon too. This short history of our relationship with non-aboriginal governments gives the context of the ongoing struggle faced by Musqueam and other First Nations. This is not just old history of a bygone day, like many seem to think. The negative effects of that dispossession, the poverty and damage to our communities and people, continue to this day. And the discriminatory attitudes and prejudice towards aboriginal people which fueled the process still persist. In 1994, Chief Justice Esson of the BC Supreme Court observed “that natives have historically been and continue to be the object of bias and prejudice which, in some respects, has become more overt and widespread in recent years as a result of tensions created by developments in such areas as land claims and fishing rights.” (2) Musqueam has always resisted this dispossession
as best we could. Our preferred method of settling disputes is negotiation,
but government does not always respond to reasonable persuasion. As
a result, in the modern era (3), our resistance has
taken the form of litigation against the government. Twice we have gone
to the highest court in the country. The first case we took was Guerin
(1984), when we successfully sued the government for $10 million
for breach of fiduciary duty, and the second was Sparrow
(1990), the first Supreme Court of Canada decision the constitutional
guarantee of aboriginal rights in section 35 of the Constitution Act,
1982. Both decisions have become legal landmarks (4).
They put in place the legal foundation for later cases like the well-known
Supreme Court Delgamuukw
(1997) (5) decision on aboriginal title. Both Guerin and Sparrow were major factors in changing the century old provincial government policy of refusing to participate in treaty negotiations for settlement of aboriginal rights and title in British Columbia. Commentary on Guerin et al. v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 335 Commentary on
Ronald Edward Sparrow v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075 Press
Release: Sparrow 1990 © 2003 - Musqueam Indian Band. Site by Metaform
|
|
