Upholding Sacred Pacts: The Unyielding Fight for Treaty Rights on Turtle Island
On Turtle Island, the ancestral lands now largely encompassed by Canada and the United States, the concept of treaties extends far beyond mere historical documents. They are the foundational agreements, sacred pacts forged between Indigenous nations and settler governments, intended to govern relationships, share lands, and ensure mutual respect and benefit. Yet, for centuries, the spirit and intent of these treaties have been systematically undermined, misinterpreted, and violated, igniting an enduring and resolute struggle by Indigenous peoples to assert and uphold their inherent rights. This article delves into the vital advocacy for treaty rights, exploring their profound significance, the historical injustices faced, and the unwavering commitment to justice and self-determination that defines this ongoing movement.
At its core, a treaty is a nation-to-nation agreement. Prior to European contact, Indigenous nations on Turtle Island had sophisticated political, legal, and economic systems. They entered into treaties with each other, establishing alliances, sharing territories, and resolving disputes. When European powers arrived, they initially sought to engage with Indigenous peoples through similar diplomatic frameworks. The Royal Proclamation of 1763, for instance, a cornerstone of Canadian constitutional law, explicitly recognized Indigenous title to land and mandated that land could only be ceded through treaties with the Crown.
These early treaties, particularly those in Eastern Canada and the Maritimes, often focused on peace and friendship, trade, and military alliances. As settler populations grew and expansionist desires intensified, later treaties, such as the numbered treaties across the prairies and parts of Ontario, became instruments for land cession, often under immense pressure, misunderstanding, and the looming threat of starvation or conflict. Indigenous nations, facing dwindling resources and devastating epidemics, often saw these agreements as a means to secure survival, maintain their way of life, and share the land, not to surrender their sovereignty entirely. They understood the treaties as living documents that established an ongoing relationship, based on mutual obligations and respect for their inherent rights to govern themselves, hunt, fish, trap, and maintain their cultural practices.
However, settler governments, driven by colonial ambitions, quickly moved to interpret treaties in their favour, viewing them as a means to extinguish Indigenous title and assimilate Indigenous peoples. Promises of education, healthcare, and economic support were often poorly fulfilled or weaponized to control and dispossess. The very concept of "sharing" land was replaced by an assertion of absolute Crown sovereignty, relegating Indigenous peoples to reserves and reserves, and stripping them of their self-governance. This profound divergence in understanding has been the source of centuries of conflict and injustice.
The advocacy for treaty rights is, therefore, a multifaceted and persistent endeavour. It is rooted in the belief that these agreements are not relics of the past but living, binding commitments that must be honoured in their original spirit and intent. Indigenous leaders, Elders, legal scholars, and grassroots activists continually emphasize that treaty rights are not "special rights" or privileges granted by the Crown, but rather inherent rights affirmed and protected by solemn agreements, often with spiritual significance, and recognized by domestic and international law.
One of the most powerful tools in this advocacy has been the legal system, though it has often been a battleground. Landmark Supreme Court cases in Canada, such as Calder v. British Columbia (1973), which first recognized Aboriginal title, and subsequent rulings like R. v. Sparrow (1990), which affirmed existing Aboriginal rights, and Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997) and Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia (2014), which provided critical clarification on Aboriginal title, have slowly but incrementally affirmed the legal validity of Indigenous rights. These cases have forced governments to acknowledge that Indigenous rights exist outside of treaties, and that treaty rights are constitutionally protected. Yet, litigation is costly, time-consuming, and often adversarial, further straining already tense relationships.
Beyond the courtroom, political advocacy is relentless. Organizations like the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) in Canada, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) in the U.S., and numerous tribal councils and Indigenous governments tirelessly lobby governments, educate the public, and push for policy reforms that uphold treaty obligations. Their calls are for nation-to-nation negotiations, true self-determination, and the full implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
UNDRIP, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007 and endorsed by Canada and the U.S. (though the U.S. initially opposed and later supported with qualifications), is a crucial international framework. It affirms Indigenous peoples’ rights to self-determination, lands, territories and resources, culture, identity, language, employment, health, education, and other rights. Critically, it enshrines the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), stating in Article 19: "States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them." This principle is a direct challenge to the historical practice of governments making decisions about Indigenous lands and resources without Indigenous consent, a fundamental violation of treaty relationships.
Grassroots movements are also at the forefront of this advocacy. Land defenders across Turtle Island, from Standing Rock Sioux Nation resisting the Dakota Access Pipeline to the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs asserting jurisdiction over their unceded territories against the Coastal GasLink pipeline, embody the living spirit of treaty rights. These movements often face state repression, media misrepresentation, and public misunderstanding, yet they persist, drawing strength from their ancestral responsibilities and the deep connection to their lands. Their actions highlight the direct link between treaty rights and environmental protection, as Indigenous worldviews often emphasize stewardship and sustainable relationships with the land, contrasting sharply with the extractivist impulses of industrial development.
The advocacy for treaty rights is not just about historical justice; it is profoundly about the future. It is about ensuring the well-being of Indigenous communities, fostering economic self-sufficiency, revitalizing languages and cultures, and protecting ecological integrity. It is about creating societies where Indigenous nations can flourish on their own terms, exercising their inherent right to self-governance as envisioned in the original spirit of the treaties.
For non-Indigenous people, understanding and supporting treaty rights is a crucial step towards reconciliation. It requires acknowledging the historical injustices, educating oneself about local treaties and their implications, and advocating for governments to honour their commitments. It means moving beyond a paternalistic view of Indigenous peoples to one of respect for nationhood and inherent rights. As John Borrows, a leading Anishinaabe legal scholar, notes, "Treaties are not just about what was taken, but also about what was promised, and what continues to be owed."
The path forward demands a radical shift in approach. It requires governments to move beyond litigation and towards genuine nation-to-nation negotiation, driven by mutual respect and the recognition of Indigenous sovereignty. It necessitates a commitment to fully implement UNDRIP and integrate FPIC into all decision-making processes that affect Indigenous lands and peoples. It calls for comprehensive public education to dismantle racist stereotypes and foster a deeper understanding of Indigenous history, cultures, and legal traditions.
Ultimately, the fight for treaty rights on Turtle Island is a testament to the resilience, strength, and unwavering determination of Indigenous peoples. It is a demand for justice, a call for integrity, and a blueprint for a future where all nations can coexist in peace and mutual respect. Honoring these sacred pacts is not just a moral imperative; it is fundamental to building truly just and equitable societies across Turtle Island. The work is ongoing, but the commitment to uphold these foundational agreements remains as strong and vibrant as the nations who signed them.
.jpg "advocating for treaty rights Turtle Island")
