Copyright © 2000 NLThomas
All Rights Reserved

As we have learned once again this week, the face of the victim of racism Canadian-style is, more often than not, Aboriginal.

The face of the perpetrator may be that of a cop in Saskatoon or at Ipperwash Park, or a farmer in Blenheim (Ontario), or a fisherman at Burnt Church. But the colour of the perpetrator's face is almost always white. For this reason, two of the Coalition's non-Aboriginal Spokespeople are addressing this press conference in Toronto today. This is our work, to deal with Canadian racism towards Native peoples.

We call on our own people and our representatives in public offices to be accountable for the cop or two or three out west who have been dumping Native men out of town to walk back or die of exposure. We call for public accountability regarding the farmers, towns people and local politicians who launched a "Not For Sale" campaign when they learned that the Caldwell First Nation, near Blenhein, Ontario, had finally settled a 200-year old land and treaty rights dispute, and will be buying property in the neighbourhood. We call for public accountability over the fishermen and Department of Fisheries personnel who trashed and/or confiscated thousands of dollars of fishing equipment belonging to Mi'kmaq fishermen after they asserted their treaty right to a "moderate livelihood".

We might like to think of these as "isolated incidents", not characteristic of our polite and comfortable view of ourselves as white Canadians. But how many "isolated incidents" do there have to be before we can recognize a pattern? It is clear that underneath the individual acts of racism by hot-headed local authorities and community members, there is systemic racism which breeds these acts of hatred and violence.

When Dudley George was shot and killed by the Ontario Provincial police almost five years ago, he became the first and only Native man to die in a land claims dispute in Canada in the 20th century.

Yet, neither the provincial nor the federal government has called a public inquiry into what happened, an inquiry that would recommend protocols to lessen the likelihood of this kind of tragedy repeating itself. Through government negligence, a climate has been created in which police and others believe they can mistreat people with impunity.

Why has government failed to act? Government is part of the problem.

Here in Ontario, documents obtained under Freedom of Information show that the decision to "confront the Indians in the park" (at Ipperwash), with the permission to use force if necessary) can be traced directly to the Premier's Office. Yet, the only finding of wrong-doing so far is that an OPP officer has been convicted of criminal negligence causing death. Deane fired the gun, but Ontario officials much higher up the chain of command apparently gave him permission to do so.

No wonder the provincial government has refused to call an inquiry and is stonewalling the case for "Wrongful Death", brought against Premier Harris and members of his 1995 Cabinet by the George family.

And, no wonder the Chiefs of Ontario noted almost three years ago, with reference to Ipperwash and other cases left unaddressed (Resolution #98/17), that "a pattern has emerged under the current provincial government where First Nations citizens are at risk of being injured or killed by the OPP in their own communities."

Recent events show that the situation is no better elsewhere in Canada.

Earlier this week, Phil Fontaine, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, called the allegations that Saskatoon police officers had left two Aboriginal men to freeze to death the "tip of the iceberg". Quoted in the Saskatoon Star Pheonix on February 19th, Fontaine drew this comparison: "No one believed our people about the residential school abuse, and now we have 7,000 claims before the courts. We know the justice system has had great difficulty being fair to our people." Fontaine also commented on the Ipperwash case an another example in which Aboriginal have suffered from police injustice.

The federal government, which has a constitutionally mandated fiduciary responsibility for "Indians and lands reserved for Indians", has done very little to stop the escalating violence against Aboriginal people and communities.

In last year's report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the federal government acknowledged that the situation of Aboriginal Peoples is Canada's "most pressing human rights issue". But Ottawa has, as yet, failed to act on the UNHRC's recommendation, urging the "State party [Canada] to establish a public inquiry into all aspects" of the Ipperwash case, "including the role and responsibility of public officials".

Instead of acting on Ipperwash, as obliged through international human rights covenants, it seems that Ministers of the federal Cabinet are maiking every effort to conceal the fact that they can, constitutionally, call an inquiry into Ipperwash. We recently obtained some information through the Access to Information process which, while a considerable amount was held back, indicates that federal lawyers agree with the Coalition expert legal counsel: Ottawa can call an inquiry into Ipperwash.

On March 17, 1999, then-Minister of Indian Affairs, Jane Stewart, took our legal opinion and promised to get back to us with the federal legal response. We heard nothing from her until she was moved to HRDC in August. Since August, when Nault became Minister, we have written him three letters, forwarded to him a transcript of the UNHRC's comments about the need for an Ipperwash inquiry, asked for the federal opinion on their mandate to call such an inquiry, and made two lengthy telephone calls to his assistants.

Minister Nault has not answered any of our letters. Our phone calls to him fell on deaf ears. Jane Stewart never got back to us, although the Access to Information material makes it clear that she had the Justice Department's response to our legal opinion, on federal role and responsibility vis-à-vis Ipperwash, by mid-April 1999. few weeks ago, we demanded an answer by mid-February. A few days ago, we received a letter from Nault's Ontario political assistant, Patti Skillen, saying he could "not accommodate" a meeting with us. Skillen's letter was a few sentences long and did not address any of the points made in our correspondence or in the March 1999 legal opinion.

Why this huge silence from Indian Affairs on Ipperwash?

It is clear what they are trying to hide from us: their legal opinion agrees with ours. We know that their opinion agrees with ours because of the Access to Information material as well as materials we have received from another source.

Ottawa could call an inquiry into Ipperwash. It would perhaps be limited in terms of its ability to subpoena witnesses by constitutional jurisdictions and the protection offered to the "Crown", but it would get at many of the outstanding facts. Important pieces of the puzzle could be fitted together. There is always the possibility that those who couldn't be subpoenaed might choose to voluntarily step forward and give evidence to a federal inquiry.

Our Coalition advocates a federal inquiry, even if it is limited. A limited inquiry is better than no inquiry and the more truth that emerges, the sooner we will come to know the full truth. Sam George, Dudley's older brother and Administrator for his Estate, concurs with Coalition on this matter.

As a latch ditch effort to begin a productive dialogue with Ottawa officials around the need for a federal inquiry, we have written the Prime Minister of Canada, the Honourable Jean Chretien, asking him to assist with this effort. In this letter, we stressed our view that an Ipperwash inquiry must be mandated to develop a template of protocols. These protective policies would be used whenever tensions build as Aboriginal Peoples assert their treaty and inherent rights, such as at Burnt Church. We don't want another tragedy, like Ipperwash, or at Oka.

Now is the time for the Prime Minister of Canada to act because his Cabinet Ministers have failed to uphold their duties to be accountable to the Canadian electorate, by refusing to dialogue with us on this crucial matter. They have also failed to protect Canada's reputation as a champion of human rights by ignoring the UNHRC's instruction to call an inquiry. And most importantly, his current Indian Affairs Minister is neglecting his fiduciary and constitutional mandate to protect "Indians".

It's easy to dismiss the stories we hear, of racist violence against Aboriginal persons, as "isolated incidents" but, to a Native person these appear to be common occurrences, not extraordinary tragedies. To the international community, these stories are developing a familiar Canadian-style ring to them.

The Coalition has a number of other pieces of strategy which will unfold over the coming weeks. Yet, for the next month or so we will be watching closely for any movement in Ottawa, asessing the extent of political commitment to a productive dialogue on an Ipperwash inquiry. In the meantime, our legal team is researching a number of legal strategies.

As non-Aboriginal Spokespersons for the Coalition we feel obliged to advocate that the Coalition use every means possible to hold Canadian politicians responsible for taking the action which is necessary at this time.

Unfortunately, what we see, is that when Canadian authorities do act in these crises, it has often been in the interests of non-Natives. Mi'kmaq activist Noah Augustine wrote about this in the Toronto Star this week, in relation to the violent response to the Marshall Decision. He pointed out that even when Aboriginal People have their rights upheld by the courts, the federal government is quick to begin to speak of "other compelling public objectives" that relegate Native people, once again to the sidelines.

Instead of helping those who are the victims of racist policies and actions, government interventions all too frequently seem to create an atmosphere of permission, perpetuating racism and violence.

If Canadian authorities are not ready to protect civil rights, save lives and strengthen the stability of Canada as a nation, then we will once again appeal to the court of world opinion for justice.