Law Times

Page 12 September 29, 2014 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com Loss for First Nations at SCC has silver lining BY JudY van rhiJn For Law Times he Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Grassy Narrows First Nation v. Ontario (Natural Resources) on July 11 ended a dispute that has played out in northern woodlots and in the courts for the last 15 years. The First Nations of the Keewatin area maintained that Treaty 3, which dated back to when there was no provincial government in existence, could prevent the allocation of pro- vincial logging licences inside their traditional area. They con- tended, unsuccessfully, that the federal government needed to be the principal player in the ne- gotiations. Bill Gallagher, a lawyer and author based in Waterloo, Ont., has followed the case closely. "In the Supreme Court, the over- riding issue was which Crown comes to the table," he says. "The Keewatin wanted Ottawa, but the court found that the proper evolutionary Crown to the treaty is Ontario. It's the living-tree argument. That's how the country has evolved." The case attracted the interest of other provinces, many of which have no cul- ture of federal involvement. "Ontario First Nations are off the mark when they say it is a loss because they are not dealing with Ottawa," says Gallagher. "There are other provinc- es where if you said you had to have Ottawa at the table, you would be laughed out of the room. The history of Alberta, for instance, means that they would not toler- ate Ottawa's intrusion. This court challenge would not have been considered in other places." Despite the loss on this point, Gallagher believes the case handed the Keewatin and all First Nations a significant silver lining. "Typically, First Nations rarely leave court empty handed. In this case, I maintain that at the Ontario Court of Appeal they actu- ally won a new doctrine that I've entitled the doctrine of honourable management in the taking up of treaty lands." These are the lands beyond the reserve dealing with the expanded area First Nations in effect surrendered when they signed the treaty, he notes. "When dealing with tra- ditional lands where there is a legitimate right for the Crown to step in and take up land — such as for lumber- ing, mining, and infrastruc- ture — First Nations have to receive the highest duty to consult and uphold the hon- our of the Crown," says Gal- lagher. "The whole idea of the treaties was to open up land for immigration and resource de- velopment, but this has become an area of conf lict in the prov- ince. Along comes this doctrine of expanded duty to consult by a fairly knowledgeable court. The Court of Appeal was on their game on this. It was not over- turned by the Supreme Court in any manner and it is noted in the judgment that Ontario ac- cepts the doctrine and eagerly wishes to embrace it." Gallagher suggests the pro- vincial government's struggles with this issue in the past are likely behind its eagerness to adopt this doctrine. "There are huge areas of northern Ontario where explorers have been in- vited to leave because there has not been proper consultation. There are two or three lawsuits ongoing by prospectors against Ontario who can't access land they've spent money to explore and a list of corporations that have been bought off or have settled in litigation of this na- ture. This province is still try- ing to get its resources section to function at a better level." Julie Abouchar, a partner at Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP in Toronto, says the decision underscores the responsibility of the provincial government in its fiduciary ob- ligation and duty to consult. "That's the key takeaway point," she says. "They always did have that duty, but it was not always clear. There were arguments about the federal government hav- ing responsibility under the Constitution regarding Indians and lands reserved for Indians. That was always hovering in the background in addition to the words of the specific treaty. Now the obligations on the province are clear." Abouchar notes the obliga- tion will also apply to the fed- eral government depending on which level of government is making the decision. "The fed- eral government also has ob- ligations under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act, although they have been eroded by re- cent legislative changes," says Abouchar, who has observed a steady increase in involvement by the province on First Nations issues. "This decision is sup- porting that progress." When considering whether the province will be involved in every consultation from now on, Abouchar says this case doesn't really answer that question. "The province is able to delegate procedural aspects of the con- sultation and certain acts in the process to resource developers. Generally, they do this without a lot of guidance as to how to do it, which has been a concern over the years. After [the] Keewatin [decision], the province has a very clear role and obligation for consultation. It will be harder for them just to have third par- ties do it without any oversight or involvement." LT FOCUS Introducing the new CriminalSource ™ on WestlawNext ® Canada. Nothing else compares. The new CriminalSource™ is home to Canada's largest collection of case law, annotations, and commentary from criminal law experts – all presented to you in every search. So you spend less time searching and more time finding. • Never miss a case using the unmatched collection of reported and unreported Criminal and related cases exclusive to CriminalSource™ – including the Canadian Criminal Cases (the CCCs) • Get relevant Criminal Law expert insight and analysis in minutes to help you interpret the law – and build a legal strategy in less time and with more confidence • Link directly from any section of the Criminal Code to detailed commentary and annotations from Canada's leading criminal law experts – including Martin's Annotated Criminal Code, Martin's Annotated Related Criminal Statutes, Tremeear's Annotated Criminal Code and Tremeear's Annotated Related Criminal Statutes With so much at stake, every case deserves the best research. See for yourself. Watch a demo at westlawnextcanada.com/criminalsource Call 1-866-609-5811 00223AX-A46861 T 'In this case, I maintain that at the Ontario Court of Appeal they actually won a new doctrine that I've entitled the doctrine of honourable management in the taking up of treaty lands,' says Bill Gallagher.

• Cover