Supreme Court ruling mandates Canada to address long-ignored treaty obligations to Anishinaabe communities

Mercury contamination in Grassy Narrows First Nation has been an ongoing issue since the 1960s and '70s when the Dryden Paper Mill dumped an estimated nine tonnes of mercury into the water. The contamination has had severe health impacts on the community, with residents experiencing symptoms of mercury poisoning from consuming fish from the river. The First Nation has appealed to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to address the issue and seek justice. The IACHR hearing is part of the First Nation's efforts to push the Ontario and federal governments to take action. Grassy Narrows has also filed a lawsuit against the governments and held protests to raise awareness of the issue. The IACHR has the power to make recommendations to the governments for reparations and to prevent future harms. The case highlights potential human rights violations under the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. The federal government has committed to supporting the construction of a new water treatment plant to address the contamination. The Grassy Narrows population, including Chief Rudy Turtle, continues to suffer from the impacts of mercury poisoning, and there are concerns about the increasing levels of methylmercury in the river system. The community is also dealing with mental health issues, including youth suicides. The Mercury Care Home has been established as a temporary solution to provide basic health-care services. The government of Canada is working with Grassy Narrows and other Indigenous Peoples to address the contamination and improve service delivery. However, caution must be taken in the cleanup of the river system to prevent the volatilization of mercury. The IACHR commissioner emphasizes the need for preventative action and suggests that direct dialogue between the community and governments may help facilitate a resolution.

In addition to the mercury contamination issue, Grassy Narrows First Nation has taken legal action against the Ontario government over the province's Mining Act and the lack of consultation on land claims. The First Nation has issued a notice of application in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, stating that the Mining Act does not require prospectors to consult with First Nations before staking claims on their traditional lands. The notice of application highlights that there are approximately 10,000 mining claims in Grassy Narrows's interim area of interest for mining, which covers more than 2,850 square kilometers. Grassy Narrows is requesting an order that prevents Ontario from issuing any further mining claims in or around its land and seeks declarations that sections of the Mining Act are contrary to the Constitution's Sec. 35 and that Ontario has a duty to consult, accommodate, and obtain free, prior, and informed consent from Asubpeeschoseewagong Anishinabek.

The legal action taken by Grassy Narrows First Nation sheds light on the ongoing struggle for Indigenous rights and the need for meaningful consultation and consent when it comes to resource extraction on Indigenous lands. The case also underscores the importance of recognizing and addressing historical injustices, such as the mercury contamination, that continue to have profound impacts on Indigenous communities.

[71c02a1d] [6ca7181f]

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the Crown must address its long-standing obligations to the Anishinaabe communities surrounding Lakes Huron and Superior. The ruling mandates negotiations after the historic breach of the Robinson Treaties impacts First Nations communities. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that both Canada and the province of Ontario have 'dishonourably breached' the Robinson Treaties established in 1850. The annual payment to Indigenous communities has been set at a meager $4 per person since 1874, despite significant economic changes and resource extraction in the area. Legal representatives of the affected First Nations claim potential financial implications of this ruling could reach up to $126 billion. The ruling requires the Crown to negotiate a settlement within six months, or risk further legal action. First Nations leaders express a mix of emotion upon receiving the news, emphasizing the potential impact on local well-being and infrastructure development. The ruling highlights the need for the Crown to take accountability for its past actions concerning its treaty commitments. Critics view the situation as emblematic of a larger national failure to uphold treaty obligations and engage meaningfully with Indigenous communities. The ruling emphasizes that treaty agreements should be viewed as living documents, requiring ongoing commitment and respect. The ruling presents an opportunity for reconciliation and reparative justice. Lawyers representing the First Nations are ready to engage in negotiations for reconciliation. The Court's ruling serves as a beacon of hope, reminding that justice must be honored through action. [6f4da535]