First Nations - Who Decides?

The hereditary leaders of the Wet'suwet'en First Nation, in northern BC, are insisting that the proposed natural gas pipeline not go through their traditional territory. In spite of a ruling by the BC supreme court that the company be allowed to proceed, the leaders and other supporters are blocking the road, knowing that arrests are likely.

I am not sure what all of the fuss is about. I think the law is clear: on land that is not governed by treaty, the traditional Indigenous peoples have the right to control what happens on their land. If the corporation does not have permission from the people to build a pipeline - the pipeline cannot be built. End of story.

My only question is who - within that specific First Nation, gets to decide what is allowed. The present situation is confused because the elected leaders agreed to the pipeline being built while the hereditary leadership did not. In fact, they may not have been even asked.The elected leadership system imposed upon those people by the Canadian government is flawed. One person, one vote is not part of the cultural heritage of most (any?) First Nations. The other option, based on centuries of tradition is that leadership is hereditary. The right to lead is passed down through either the maternal or paternal line (1).

As someone who believes in democracy, the concept of someone inheriting power and control is an anathema. It is contrary to every social, economic or political value I have. There are far too many examples in our collective histories where an individual, because they believed that they had the right to have control due to who their parents or grandparents were, oppressed their people. We do not have kings or queens ruling our lives for a reason.

While I fully appreciate that in our drive to create lives that are easy and comfortable, we may have lost some of those core values that may be critical for our survival as a species. In our never-ending search for maximum comfort with a minimum amount of energy expended, we have willingly destroyed hundreds of thousands of hectares of irreplaceable resources. Having a leadership that is at least in part immersed in cultural values would have perhaps insured that the destruction would not have been so complete. But at what cost? Would such immersion in past cultural practices limited our capacity to grow? However, regardless of my opinions as to who should govern - it is not my decision. It is the decision of each First Nation.

But they must decide who gets to have control. We cannot demand that governments and companies engage with Indigenous communities in a meaningful, respectful way if those communities cannot agree who should be at the table. There is no point having negotiations if the signed agreement will be contested by members of that community.

I am not too sure how a consensus could be reached. But the communities themselves must find a way. The national government can not/should not decide for them



1) https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/hereditary-chief-definition-and-5-faqs