A new report on Indigenous identity fraud says the problem was allowed to grow for years in the academy because universities and the public misunderstood Indigenous identity, and the institutions did not foresee that some would exploit that ignorance to their advantage.
The report, written by Métis lawyer Jean Teillet for the University of Saskatchewan, delves into how identity can be verified based on evidence and relationships with Indigenous peoples. It describes how self-identification, a kind of honour system, has been manipulated by people who have either fabricated or embellished their claims.
The report was commissioned a year ago in the wake of allegations about former University of Saskatchewan professor Carrie Bourassa, a prominent researcher who was accused of making false claims about her identity. Dr. Bourassa resigned her post at the university earlier this year, at which point the report shifted from a focus on her case to the broader issue. It makes no mention at all of Dr. Bourassa.
University of Saskatchewan president Peter Stoicheff said the report will hold significance for all universities and other institutions across the country grappling with the issue.
“Self-identification is no longer going to be the appropriate measure,” he said.
But the university, as an institution, should not be the one making judgments about identity, Dr. Stoicheff said. That is up to the Indigenous communities themselves. The university has a standing committee led by Indigenous people that will examine this report and determine how to proceed, he added.
Ms. Teillet writes that Indigenous identity fraud is becoming more common, and that “those passing as Indigenous in Canada now number in the tens of thousands.” She identifies two kinds of frauds: those who use a distant ancestor to make a claim to identity, and those who simply make it up. They are motivated sometimes by the pursuit of advantage, she writes, and sometimes it stems from a sense of guilt and a desire to “move to innocence.”
In the university world, the perpetrators are more likely to be women, Ms. Teillet writes.
Universities share some of the responsibility for not stemming the incidence of fraud, she says, because they didn’t anticipate the extent to which people might seek to capitalize on the lack of verification.
The report identifies a number of common red flags, such as changing claims of ancestry, shifting facts, vague references to place, and a reliance on DNA tests, among other things.
“Indigenous peoples’ own definitions of legitimate Indigenous identity do not focus on long-ago ancestors identified through a test. Indigenous identity is based on a living community made up of one’s relations – one’s family, community, and nation,” Ms. Teillet writes.
A number of universities across Canada have recently faced questions about the identity claims of members of their staff and faculty. For students, too, there is concern that scholarships intended for Indigenous peoples could be subject to fraudulent claims, as could seats reserved for Indigenous applicants.
Ms. Teillet concludes it would not be advisable to ask current Indigenous faculty and staff to prove their prior identity claims. She suggests the university could create a complaints process specific to identity fraud overseen by an Indigenous person or committee.
Ms. Teillet says that the University of Saskatchewan may also want to create a declaration form, which specifies when a person began to identify as Indigenous, which community or nation they’re connected to, whether they’ve been accepted by that group, and an acknowledgment that their claims will be checked.
“Fraudsters have been slipping into the academy because they could, because no one checked, and because no one thought they should check Indigenous identity claims. Sending a clear signal that those days are over will act as a strong deterrent,” Ms. Teillet writes.
Earlier this year, Réal Carrière, a politics professor of Cree and Métis background, turned down a job offer at the University of Saskatchewan in part because he objected to being asked for documentation to prove his bona fides. Prof. Carriere said at the time he was in favour of a verification process, but that the documents he was asked to provide, such as status cards, stemmed from colonial processes designed to control Indigenous peoples, rather than being rooted in community and family relationships.
Since that time, the university has brought in a policy that requires applicants to provide evidence supporting their claims to citizenship in an Indigenous group, but what kind of evidence is determined by the Indigenous communities themselves.
Joe Friesen