Researchers who work on First Nations claims against Ottawa say the federal government is holding up their requests for historical records unless they divulge specifics about the cases they’re working on and provide assurances they won’t share the archives with anyone – including affected Indigenous communities.
The National Claims Research Directors (NCRD), a body representing the managers of more than 30 organizations that search for evidence related to disputes between First Nations and the Crown, denounced the new application process in a letter last week to Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Marc Miller and Attorney-General David Lametti.
“We can’t in good conscience provide what they’re asking,” said one member of the group, Jody Woods, research director with the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, in an interview. “We are essentially working as agents of the First Nation. The First Nation tells us to go out and get the documents. The documents then belong to the First Nation. How can we not share them?”
Assembly of First Nations National Chief RoseAnne Archibald has thrown her support behind the researchers, urging Mr. Miller to withdraw the new line of questioning.
“The recent changes are an affront to First Nations data sovereignty and could adversely impact First Nations by requiring disclosure of detailed information at an inappropriate state in the claims process,” she wrote in a letter to the minister.
For its part, the federal government insists the application process hasn’t changed. A spokesperson for Mr. Miller’s office, Renelle Arsenault, said in a written statement that Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) has proposed a new version of the form needed to request documents on behalf of Indigenous groups, but “no additional information is being requested and no new mechanism has been put in place.”
She added: “Additionally, partners can still use the previous form – the revised form has not been formally implemented or imposed, but shared for partner feedback.”
But the researchers have received a far different message.
Ms. Woods said she first learned of the new conditions in January when CIRNAC information analysts began contacting researchers asking for additional details about their requests. They wanted to know the nature of the underlying claim, the proposed use of the documents and the names of involved parties, according to correspondence viewed by The Globe and Mail.
“We were blindsided,” Ms. Woods said. “These new requirements were imposed without any consultation with First Nations or First Nations organizations. It contravenes the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and impedes access to justice.”
The disagreement centres around the government’s specific claims process, the mechanism whereby First Nations can make claims against Ottawa for violating treaty obligations or mismanaging their assets such as land.
In the 2022-23 fiscal year alone, the federal government settled more than 40 claims amounting to $2.5-billion. The largest of those was a $1.3-billion settlement with Siksika Nation in Alberta, compensation for taking 115,000 hectares of prime land in 1910 and selling it to European settlers. From the original Siksika claim to final settlement took 62 years.
To mount such claims, First Nations need to request and analyze reams of archival government documents such as correspondence, lease papers, instructions to surveyors and other records that might illuminate the extent of Ottawa’s transgressions, if any. The work of shepherding those document requests and interpreting their contents is left to a few dozen centralized research units across the country that work on behalf of First Nations.
For decades, their work was subject to access-to-information legislation, creating long delays and sporadic access to records. In 1999, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada hatched a new request process in collaboration with researchers that granted First Nations expedited, informal access to records for use in specific claims.
Under the informal request system, researchers have to submit a formal resolution from chief and council showing they have the community’s authorization to access historical government documents.
Ms. Arsenault said CIRNAC welcomes feedback and will address the issue at a coming NCRD meeting in May. But Ms. Woods is concerned about what happens to claims until then.
“I met with my research staff yesterday who expressed considerable frustration that some of their claims were stalled because of this,” she said.
Patrick White