Reclaiming the Language of Law: The Contemporary Articulation and A

374 Pages·2016·1.53 MB·English

by  Hadley Friedland

Reclaiming
 the
 Language
 of
 Law:
 The
 Contemporary
 Articulation
 and

Application
 of
 Cree
 Legal
 Principles
 in
 Canada

by

Hadley
 Louise
 Friedland

A
 thesis
 submitted
 in
 partial
 fulfillment
 of
 the
 requirements
 for
 the
 degree
 of

Doctor
 of
 Philosophy

Faculty
 of
 Law

University
 of
 Alberta

©
 Hadley
 Louise
 Friedland,
 2016
Abstract

The
 Truth
 and
 Reconciliation
 Commission
 of
 Canada
 states
 the
 revitalization
 and

application
 of
 Indigenous
 laws
 is
 vital
 for
 re-­‐establishing
 respectful
 relations
 in

Canada.
 It
 is
 also
 vital
 for
 restoring
 and
 maintaining
 safety,
 peace
 and
 order
 in

Indigenous
 communities.
 This
 thesis
 explores
 how
 to
 accomplish
 this
 objective.
 It

examines
 current
 challenges,
 resources
 and
 opportunities
 for
 recovering,
 learning

and
 practicing
 Indigenous
 laws.
 It
 develops
 a
 highly
 structured
 methodology
 for

serious
 and
 sustained
 engagement
 with
 Indigenous
 legal
 traditions,
 based
 on

reviewing
 existing
 methods,
 then
 combining
 the
 methods
 of
 two
 leading
 Indigenous

legal
 scholars,
 John
 Borrows
 and
 Val
 Napoleon.
 This
 method
 approaches
 Indigenous

stories
 as
 jurisprudence.
 It
 uses
 adapted
 legal
 analysis
 and
 synthesis
 to
 identify

Indigenous
 legal
 principles
 from
 stories
 and
 oral
 histories
 and
 organize
 these

principles
 into
 a
 rigorous
 and
 transparent
 analytical
 framework.
 These
 legal

principles
 can
 then
 be
 readily
 accessed,
 understood
 and
 applied.

This
 thesis
 demonstrates
 this
 adapted
 legal
 analysis
 method
 is
 teachable,

transferable
 and
 replicable,
 using
 research
 outcomes
 of
 Cree
 legal
 principles

responding
 to
 violence,
 harms
 and
 conflicts.
 Through
 the
 example
 of
 a
 foundational

Cree
 legal
 principle,
 “wah-­ko-­to-­win”
 (our
 inter-­‐relatedness),
 it
 demonstrates
 how

this
 method
 can
 also
 deepen
 our
 understanding
 of
 background
 or
 ‘meta-­‐principles’

within
 Indigenous
 legal
 traditions,
 which
 can
 help
 us
 interpret,
 apply
 and
 change

laws
 in
 legitimate
 ways.
 It
 then
 demonstrates
 how
 the
 research
 outcomes
 from
 this

method
 may
 be
 understood
 and
 applied
 by
 Indigenous
 communities,
 through
 a
 case

study
 exploring
 the
 development
 of
 a
 contemporary
 Cree
 criminal
 justice
 process

  ii
based
 on
 Cree
 legal
 principles,
 by
 and
 with
 the
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak.
 Finally,
 it

examines
 the
 current
 narratives
 about
 the
 appalling
 rates
 of
 violence
 against
 and

over-­‐incarceration
 of
 Indigenous
 people
 in
 Canada
 and
 the
 existing
 gap
 between

legitimacy
 and
 enforcement.
 It
 proposes
 Indigenous
 legal
 reasoning
 as
 a
 bridge,
 and

develops
 the
 conceit
 of
 the
 “reasonable
 Cree
 person”
 to
 examine
 whether
 principled

Cree
 legal
 reasoning
 can
 be
 explicitly
 recognized
 and
 implemented
 within
 Canada’s

current
 political
 and
 legal
 systems.
 It
 concludes
 that,
 while
 there
 are
 many
 potential

spaces
 for
 doing
 so,
 more
 intellectual
 work
 is
 necessary
 first,
 in
 which
 both

Indigenous
 and
 non-­‐Indigenous
 people
 engage
 with
 Indigenous
 laws
 as
 laws.
 It
 is

this
 kind
 of
 deep
 engagement
 that
 is
 necessary
 to
 effectively
 and
 respectfully

operationalize
 the
 Truth
 and
 Reconciliation
 Commission’s
 compelling
 calls
 for

greater
 recognition
 of
 Indigenous
 laws
 in
 Canada.

  iii
Preface

This
 thesis
 is
 an
 original
 work
 by
 Hadley
 Friedland.

The
 research
 project,
 of
 which
 this
 thesis
 is
 a
 part,
 received
 research
 ethics
 approval

from
 the
 University
 of
 Alberta
 Research
 Ethics
 Board,
 Project
 Name:
 “Reclaiming
 the

Language
 of
 Law:
 Exploring
 the
 Contemporary
 Articulation
 and
 Application
 of
 Cree

Legal
 Principles
 in
 Canada”,
 No.

 Pro00049208,
 April
 27th,
 2015.

Chapter
 2
 of
 this
 thesis
 has
 been
 published
 as
 Hadley
 Friedland,
 “Reflective

Frameworks:
 Methods
 for
 Accessing,
 Understanding
 and
 Applying
 Indigenous
 Laws”

(2013)
 11
 (2)
 Indigenous
 Law
 Journal
 1.

Parts
 of
 this
 thesis
 are
 reproduced
 in
 reports
 that,
 while
 unpublished,
 are
 publically

available.

The
 Cree
 legal
 summary
 in
 Chapter
 3
 has
 been
 reproduced
 in
 Hadley
 Friedland,
 The

AJR
 Project
 Cree
 Legal
 Traditions
 Report
 (May
 2014),
 prepared
 for
 the
 Accessing

Justice
 and
 Reconciliation
 Project,
 on
 file
 with
 the
 University
 of
 Victoria
 Indigenous

Law
 Research
 Unit,
 the
 Indigenous
 Bar
 Association,
 the
 Truth
 and
 Reconciliation

Commission
 of
 Canada,
 the
 Ontario
 Law
 Foundation,
 and
 the
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak,

online:

http://indigenousbar.ca/indigenouslaw/wpcontent/uploads/2012/12/cree_summ
ary.pdf.
 I
 relied
 on
 research
 and
 interviews
 conducted
 by
 Kris
 Statnyk,
 Aaron
 Mills

and
 Carol
 Wanyandie.
 Maegan
 Hough
 and
 Renee
 McBeth
 edited
 it.

Some
 of
 the
 results
 and
 discussion
 in
 Chapter
 4
 have
 been
 reproduced
 in
 Hadley

Friedland,
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak
 Justice
 Project
 Report:
 Creating
 a
 Cree
 Legal
 Process

Using
 Cree
 Legal
 Principles
 (October,
 2015),
 prepared
 for
 the
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak

Nation,
 on
 file
 with
 the
 University
 of
 Victoria
 Indigenous
 Law
 Research
 Unit
 and
 the

Aseniwuche
 Winewak.

 I
 relied
 on
 interviews
 conducted
 by
 Kris
 Statnyk
 and
 Carol

Wanyandie
 and
 research
 conducted
 by
 Margot
 Bishop,
 Margaret
 Lovely
 and
 Kris

Statnyk,
 funded
 through
 the
 Indigenous
 Law
 Research
 Unit,
 University
 of
 Victoria

Faculty
 of
 Law.

  iv
Dedication

This
 dissertation
 is
 dedicated
 to
 the
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak.

It
 is
 also
 dedicated
 to
 the
 memory
 of
 those
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak
 elders
 and
 friends

who
 had
 an
 enormous
 influence
 on
 my
 work
 and
 my
 life,
 and
 passed
 on
 during
 this

project.

Dean
 Wanyandie
 was
 my
 first
 law
 teacher,
 and
 started
 me
 on
 this
 path
 with
 a
 story

by
 a
 river
 many
 years
 ago.
 He
 never
 flinched
 from
 talking
 about
 the
 tough
 stuff,

insisted
 on
 common
 sense,
 and
 pushed
 me
 to
 trust
 myself
 and
 speak
 honestly.

Lucy
 Wanyandie’s
 strength
 and
 endurance
 was
 unparalleled,
 and
 Marie
 McDonald

embodied
 love
 and
 acceptance.
 My
 brother-­‐in-­‐law,
 James
 Wanyandie,
 a
 gifted
 and

gentle
 man,
 and
 wonderful
 father,
 taught
 me
 so
 much
 about
 the
 power
 of
 kindness

and
 generosity.

I
 am
 very
 grateful
 for
 all
 I
 learned
 from
 you
 during
 your
 time
 here.
 I
 hope
 you

recognize
 the
 rightness
 and
 dignity
 of
 your
 decision-­‐making
 in
 these
 pages.

  v
Acknowledgements

Many
 people
 and
 organizations
 supported
 this
 thesis.

This
 project
 would
 not
 have
 been
 possible
 without
 support
 from
 the
 Social
 Sciences

and
 Humanities
 Research
 Council,
 including
 a
 Vanier
 Canada
 Graduate
 Scholarship

and
 an
 Impact
 Talent
 Award.
 My
 participation
 in
 the
 Legitimus
 Project
 has
 been

beneficial,
 on
 many
 levels.

I
 rely
 heavily
 on
 my
 learning
 from
 the
 research
 process
 and
 research
 results
 from

the
 Accessing
 Justice
 and
 Reconciliation
 Project,
 a
 partnership
 between
 the

Indigenous
 Law
 Research
 Unit,
 University
 of
 Victoria
 Faculty
 of
 Law,
 the
 Indigenous

Bar
 Association
 and
 the
 Truth
 and
 Reconciliation
 Commission
 of
 Canada,
 funded
 by

the
 Ontario
 Law
 Foundation.
 I
 am
 grateful
 to
 have
 had
 the
 opportunity,
 in
 my
 role
 as

research
 coordinator,
 to
 apply
 this
 method
 on
 such
 a
 scale,
 in
 such
 a
 meaningful

project.
 I
 was
 privileged
 to
 work
 with
 incredible
 colleagues
 and
 participate
 in
 many

rich
 conversations
 in
 communities
 and
 events
 across
 Canada.
 These
 people
 and

experiences
 have
 all
 contributed
 immeasurably
 to
 this
 work.

The
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak
 Nation
 was
 a
 true
 partner
 in
 my
 research.
 This
 thesis
 is

deeply
 informed
 by
 the
 leadership,
 elders
 and
 community
 members’
 goals,
 vision,

guidance
 and
 generosity.
 Thank
 you
 for
 trusting
 me
 to
 hear
 and
 honour
 your
 words

and
 wisdom,
 and
 for
 always
 being
 so
 willing
 to
 contribute
 your
 unique
 knowledge
 in

order
 to
 teach
 and
 enrich
 the
 broader
 community.

My
 co-­‐supervisors
 and
 committee
 are
 an
 extraordinarily
 brilliant,
 inspiring
 and
 kind

group
 of
 scholars,
 who
 have
 all
 been
 generous
 with
 their
 time,
 knowledge
 and

support.
 Thank
 you
 to
 my
 co-­‐supervisor,
 Val
 Napoleon.
 You
 connected
 worlds
 and

opened
 new
 ones.
 You
 were
 the
 perfect
 teacher
 and
 mentor
 for
 me.
 You
 provided

countless
 unique
 learning
 opportunities.
 Thank
 you
 to
 my
 co-­‐supervisor
 Mathew

Lewans,
 for
 your
 staunch
 support
 and
 encouragement,
 as
 well
 as
 your
 advice,

insights
 and
 adept
 infusion
 of
 legal
 theory
 that
 so
 enriched
 my
 work.
 Thank
 you
 to

my
 committee
 members,
 John
 Borrows,
 Janine
 Brodie
 and
 George
 Pavlich,
 for

making
 time
 for
 me
 despite
 your
 many
 responsibilities
 and
 other
 demands.
 I
 also

must
 say
 that
 my
 own
 work
 would
 not
 even
 be
 imaginable
 without
 both
 Val
 and

John’s
 groundbreaking
 work
 and
 willingness
 to
 kindly
 and
 generously
 support
 and

guide
 so
 many
 younger
 scholars,
 including
 me.
 I
 hope
 any
 good
 in
 my
 work
 stands

as
 a
 tribute
 to
 your
 own.

The
 University
 of
 Alberta
 Faculty
 of
 Law
 has
 been
 a
 warm
 and
 collegial
 place
 to

work
 from.
 Special
 thanks
 to
 Mr.
 Justice
 Russell
 Brown,
 who
 was
 a
 great
 co-­‐
supervisor
 before
 being
 called
 to
 the
 bench,
 Eric
 Adams
 for
 ably
 chairing
 both
 my

candidacy
 and
 final
 exams,
 Linda
 Reif,
 who
 was
 a
 smart,
 kind
 and
 collegial
 mentor,

during
 and
 after
 her
 time
 as
 Associate
 Dean
 of
 Graduate
 Studies,
 and
 Ted
 DeCoste,

  vi
who
 taught
 a
 graduate
 seminar
 we
 argued
 our
 way
 through,
 only
 to
 end
 up
 co-­‐
writing
 a
 paper
 together
 by
 the
 end.

I
 am
 grateful
 to
 have
 also
 had
 an
 amazing
 circle
 of
 diverse
 interlocutors
 during
 this

work.

I
 am
 thankful
 for
 mentorship
 and
 role-­‐modeling,
 as
 well
 as
 many
 influential
 and

enlightening
 conversations
 over
 the
 years
 with
 elders
 and
 community
 members

from
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak,
 including
 Danny
 McDonald,
 Rachelle
 McDonald,
 Tom

McDonald,
 Alice
 Moberly,
 Marianne
 Moberly,
 Edna
 Wanyandie,
 Robert
 Wanyandie,

Vicky
 Wanyandie
 and
 Brenda
 Young,
 as
 well
 as
 elders
 Adelaide
 McDonald,
 Mary

McDonald
 and
 Mabel
 Wanyandie.
 David
 MacPhee’s
 arguments
 (and
 our
 more

serious
 conversations)
 have
 been
 especially
 helpful.
 Hilda
 Hallock’s
 fearless
 and

compassionate
 discussions
 of
 the
 unspeakable,
 and
 Carol
 Wanyandie’s
 insights,

advice
 and
 translation
 as
 community
 coordinator
 were
 essential.

Over
 the
 last
 six
 years,
 too
 many
 people
 to
 name
 have
 graciously
 invited
 Val

Napoleon
 and
 myself
 into
 their
 communities
 to
 share
 this
 method.
 Your
 active

engagement,
 insights,
 questions
 and
 advice
 have
 improved
 and
 developed
 my
 own

thinking.
 Kelly
 Connor
 and
 Bonnie
 Leonard
 from
 the
 Shuswap
 National
 Tribal

Council
 took
 this
 method
 further
 than
 anyone
 else,
 including
 myself.
 I
 have
 learned

a
 lot
 from
 you
 and
 your
 work
 has
 informed
 my
 own.

I
 am
 sure
 I
 will
 miss
 some
 names,
 but
 am
 deeply
 appreciative
 of
 the
 many

conversations
 about
 this
 work
 with
 a
 welcoming
 community
 of
 experienced

scholars
 and
 contemporary
 academic
 colleagues,
 including
 Elizabeth
 Adjin-­‐Tettey,

Jessica
 Asch,
 Hannah
 Askew,
 Cathy
 Bell,
 Andree
 Boisselle,
 Lindsay
 Borrows,
 Gillian

Calder,
 Estella
 Charleson,
 Gerry
 Ferguson,
 Lori
 Groft,
 Al
 Hanna,
 Maegan
 Hough,

Rebecca
 Johnson,
 Shalene
 Jobin,
 Johnny
 Mack,
 Renee
 McBeth,
 Aaron
 Mills,
 Astrid

Perez-­‐Pinan,
 Pierrot
 Ross-­‐Tremblay,
 Judith
 Sayers,
 Kerry
 Sloan,
 Emily
 Snyder,
 Kris

Statnyk,
 Jim
 Tully
 and
 Jeremy
 Webber.
 I
 have
 had
 the
 benefit
 of
 open–minded
 and

illuminating
 discussions
 with
 colleagues
 in
 the
 legal
 profession
 about
 this
 work,

including
 Associate
 Chief
 Justice
 John
 Rooke,
 who
 has
 been
 very
 supportive,
 Judge

John
 Higgerty,
 Judge
 Donald
 Norheim,
 Jim
 Kindrake,
 Amy
 Martin-­‐LeBlanc,
 Ron

Stevenson,
 and
 many
 other
 colleagues
 from
 the
 Department
 of
 Justice,
 Canada.

Last
 but
 not
 least,
 I
 want
 to
 thank
 my
 family
 –
 my
 remarkable
 children,
 Davita
 and

Asher,
 my
 partner,
 Ken,
 my
 mom,
 Joan,
 and
 my
 sister,
 Jess,
 for
 all
 of
 your
 incredible

support,
 insights
 (and
 patience)
 through
 this
 long
 journey.
 Thank
 you
 to
 my
 brother

Eli,
 for
 your
 insightful
 feedback,
 and
 my
 brother
 Amos,
 who
 convinced
 me
 to
 start

law
 school
 in
 the
 first
 place,
 and
 never
 doubted
 me,
 even
 when
 I
 doubted
 myself.

And
 thank
 you
 to
 my
 very
 special
 little
 niece,
 Gemma,
 for
 giving
 me
 the
 opportunity

to
 live
 this,
 for
 reminding
 me
 that
 love
 is
 the
 answer,
 and
 love
 is
 an
 action.
 I
 would

do
 it
 all
 over
 again
 in
 an
 instant.
 You
 are
 a
 bright
 light
 who
 infuses
 our
 lives
 with
 joy

and
 hope.

  vii
Table
 of
 Contents

Chapter
 1:
 Introduction
 –Law,
 Suffering
 and
 Reconciliation……………………………1

Chapter
 2:
 Ay-­si-­mam-­iko-­siya:
 Methods
 for
 Accessing,
 Understanding
 and

Applying
 Indigenous
 Laws………………………………………………………………………………12

1. Introduction:
 The
 First
 Stream

2. Approaches
 to
 Engaging
 with
 Indigenous
 Legal
 Traditions:
 Resources,

Challenges
 and
 Analytical
 Frameworks

a. Identification
 of
 Legal
 Resources

b. More
 Challenges
 for
 Increased
 Practical
 Engagement
 with
 Indigenous

Legal
 Traditions

c. Indigenous
 Scholars’
 Analytical
 Frameworks
 for
 Accessing,
 Analyzing
 and

Applying
 Indigenous
 Laws

3. Next
 Steps
 for
 Legal
 Scholars

a. Learning
 from
 and
 Building
 on
 the
 Frameworks

b. A
 Case
 Study:
 Applying
 Legal
 Analysis
 and
 Synthesis
 to
 a
 ‘Deep
 Slice’
 of

Cree
 Law
 for
 the
 Wetiko
 (Windigo)
 Legal
 Principles
 Project

c. The
 Project:
 Wetiko
 (Windigo)
 Legal
 Principles

d. Legal
 Resources:
 Sifting
 through
 the
 Stereotypes

e. Method:
 Applying
 Legal
 Analysis
 and
 Synthesis
 to
 Learn
 about
 the
 Wetiko

Legal
 Category

f. Research
 Results

g. How
 This
 Method
 Addresses
 Challenges

4. Conclusion:
 Another
 Stream

Chapter
 3:
 Applying
 the
 Method
 –
 The
 Accessing
 Justice
 and
 Reconciliation

Project
 and
 the
 Cree
 Legal
 Synthesis………………………………………………………………72

1. Introduction

2. The
 AJR
 Project

3. The
 Cree
 Legal
 Summary

a. Legal
 Processes:
 Characteristics
 of
 legitimate
 decision-­‐making/problem-­‐
solving
 processes

b. Legal
 Responses
 and
 Resolutions:
 What
 principles
 govern
 appropriate

responses
 to
 legal/
 human
 issues?

c. Legal
 Obligations:
 What
 principles
 govern
 individual
 and
 collective

responsibilities?
 What
 are
 the
 “shoulds”?

d. Legal
 Rights:
 What
 should
 people
 be
 able
 to
 expect
 from
 others?

  viii
e. General
 Underlying
 Principles:
 What
 underlying
 or
 recurrent
 themes

emerge
 in
 the
 stories
 and
 interviews
 that
 might
 not
 be
 captured
 above?

4. Conclusion

Chapter
 4:
 Wah-­ko-­to-­win:
 Laws
 for
 a
 Society
 of
 Relationships…………………152

1. Introduction:
 Rich
 in
 Relations

2. Bringing
 out
 the
 Background

3. The
 Concern:
 Distortions

4. Wah-­‐ko-­‐to-­‐win:
 Relationships
 as
 Central
 and
 Foundational

a. Living
 within
 Larger
 Relationships

b. Recognizing
 the
 Fact
 of
 Relationships

c. Relationships
 as
 Rationale

d. Relationships
 as
 Resources

5. Conclusion:
 Wah-­ko-­to-­win

Chapter
 5:
 Creating
 a
 Cree
 Justice
 Process
 using
 Cree
 Legal
 Principles…….…196

1. Introduction

2. A
 Cree
 Justice
 Process
 for
 the
 Aseniwuche
 Winewak
 –
 History
 and
 Aspirations

of
 the
 Proposal

3. Methodology
 for
 Community
 Feedback

4. A
 Contemporary
 Cree
 Justice
 Process
 –
 General
 Feedback

a. Analysis

b. Discussion

5. Using
 Cree
 Legal
 Principles
 in
 a
 Cree
 Justice
 Process-­‐
 Specific
 Feedback

a. Analysis

b. Discussion

6. Conclusion

  ix
Chapter
 6:
 Navigating
 Through
 Narratives
 of
 Despair:
 Making
 Space
 for
 the

Cree
 Reasonable
 Person
 in
 the
 Canadian
 Justice
 System……………………………262

1. Introduction

2. The
 Reasonable
 Cree
 Person

3. A
 Logical
 Starting
 Point

4. The
 Cree
 Legal
 Tradition
 as
 a
 Reasoning
 Process

5. The
 Cree
 Reasonable
 Person’s
 Tools
 for
 Practical
 Reason

a. Wah-­‐ko-­‐to-­‐win

b. Good-­‐Heartedness,
 Kindness,
 Generosity
 and
 Hospitality

c. Education,
 Guidance
 and
 Support

d. Case
 by
 Case
 Reasoning
 through
 Cree
 Legal
 Principles

6. Narratives
 about
 Violence
 against
 Indigenous
 Women
 and
 Children

a. The
 Media
 Narrative

b. State
 Law’s
 Narratives

c. The
 Trauma
 Narrative

7. Spaces
 for
 Indigenous
 Laws
 in
 the
 Canadian
 Justice
 System

a. The
 Supreme
 Court’s
 Gladue
 Principles
 and
 Directives

b. Current
 Access
 to
 Justice
 and
 Community
 Justice
 Initiatives
 for
 Aboriginal

People

c. Challenges
 and
 Critiques
 of
 Community
 Justice
 and
 Healing
 Programs

8. Safety
 First?

9. The
 Reasonable
 Cree
 Person’s
 Place
 in
 the
 Current
 Justice
 System

10. Restarting
 the
 Conversation:
 Recovering
 Indigenous
 Legal
 Traditions

11.
 Conclusion

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………..333

Appendix
 A:
 AJR
 Project
 Community
 Participant
 Information
 Package…………......350

Appendix
 B:
 AWN
 Cree
 Justice
 Project
 Participant
 Information
 Package…………...352

  x