Photo by Whitehorse Star
Chief Simon Mervyn
First Nation takes YG to court over land use
The First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun has filed legal action against the Yukon government for approving a mineral exploration operation in its traditional territory without consulting the First Nation.
The First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun has filed legal action against the Yukon government for approving a mineral exploration operation in its traditional territory without consulting the First Nation.
Na-cho Nyäk Dun filed its petition with the Yukon Supreme Court on Monday.
It’s asking for several declarations from the court, including one that the government breached the honour of the Crown by failing to consult with the First Nation.
The petition also asks for a declaration the government failed in its duty to diligently implement the promises outlined in the Na-cho Nyäk Dun’s land claim agreement, including the promise to engage in regional land use planning.
The First Nation is seeking a declaration preventing the government from issuing any licence, permit or authorization for the project pending the resolution of the court case.
It’s also asking for an order preventing Metallic Minerals Corp. from doing any work on the project until the case is resolved.
The Yukon government has 30 days to respond to the petition. It does not publicly comment on matters before the courts.
Metallic Minerals applied last year for an advanced exploration permit to work in the Beaver River area north of Keno City. The government issued its decision on Feb. 19, authorizing the company to conduct its exploration project for a period of up to 10 years.
The project proposal did receive a favourable screening by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board.
Na-cho Nyäk Dun issued a press release Monday criticizing the government’s approval of the project.
“We object to the Yukon government’s authorization of a project in a highly sensitive part of the First Nation of Na-Cho Nyäk Dun traditional territory without consulting us,” Chief Simon Mervyn says in the release.
“A land use planning process is currently underway for the Tsé Tagé watershed, and this disrespectful decision by the Yukon government undermines that plan before it can even be completed and before we’ve even seen a draft plan.
“We had hoped – and expected – that the treaty promises made to us would be lived up to, and we will not stand silently by as they continue to trample on our values, our land and our rights.
“We have been waiting for more than 25 years for land use planning and real joint decision-making. We won’t wait any longer.”
The press release says the First Nation repeatedly objected to the project being authorized and repeatedly asked the Yukon government to consult directly with its citizens to hear and understand their concerns.
Government officials refused to consult with the Na-cho Nyäk Dun community, stating that consultation was “not feasible.”
The First Nation also contends the government failed to keep the promises outlined in a 2018 intergovernmental agreement regarding the development of a land use plan for the Beaver River area.
In its decision document approving the project, the government notes it sent the chief a notice on Dec. 29, 2020 indicating it would be waiting for the Beaver River land use plan to move the project forward.
Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar
In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.
Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.
Comments (17)
Up 15 Down 5
Thought Police are Everywhere... It’s a raid! on Mar 22, 2021 at 9:32 am
Dear Annie and Salt - I agree, there is too much emotionalism bunned off as fact. We are in a great crisis where delusion has become the norm, “my opinion is what matters” - It has destroyed our want, and indeed our ability for understanding one another. This is destructively disintegrative. We have become a society of narcissists with the power of “me” through which one can be anything they want to be for the mere remittance of one’s desire. This is folly and it is dangerous... Decisions and Judgments made in the press of emotion are “always” wrong because the outcome, intended and unintended, will be valued only as long as the feeling lasts. Then what? The next impulse. This is an indicator of societal breakdown - The anomic strain brought to the fore.
This is the disorder of Liberalism as a mental disorder... The Idiocracy... And it has taken root in our newest generations and it has been given legitimacy by those who want power over others - The Thought Police (TP)... And of course most people know what you should use TP for... Right?
Up 21 Down 2
Salt on Mar 20, 2021 at 4:53 pm
Annie
It is an intentional tool used by people who know that the facts don't support them, so they resort to emotional garbage to satisfy their emotional position.
Up 27 Down 5
Atom on Mar 20, 2021 at 2:53 pm
Rights and negotiations make for contradictions.
NND negotiated a big road building deal what, a week ago? And now they chuck the government under the bus. Stinky.
Up 39 Down 6
Anie on Mar 20, 2021 at 12:31 pm
Woodcutter, just because people don't agree with your opinions, that does not mean they are "uninformed", or even right wing. You may want to consider that most people who have lived and worked in the Yukon over the last couple of decades are probably, out of either necessity or interest, very familiar with the UFA and and least sufficiently familiar with most self governing agreements to at least research a question. It's a cowardly conversation tool to just insinuate "you're uninformed and I'm right, so there"
Up 20 Down 12
Yukoner ‘71 on Mar 20, 2021 at 8:41 am
Woodcutter, back in the day people would take a mouthpiece like yourself out behind the woodshed and teach him a thing or two. I don’t think it’s to late for that in 2021.
Up 37 Down 8
Salt on Mar 19, 2021 at 11:31 pm
@Woodcutter
Where does the UFA or any self-governing agreement grant FN’s management rights to “traditional territories”? If you already took the time to study them then you would know that they don’t. Settlement lands and traditional territories are well defined in the UFA and they are not interchangeable. This is a reach for power facilitated by the Liberal party. Max Mack is correct, the Liberal party uses FN governments to advance their agendas. Trudeau made that obvious in 2019.
Up 8 Down 17
TheHammer on Mar 19, 2021 at 9:26 pm
Dave@ A UN team came here to look into Land Claims. UN observer Comment, 'the government are playing word games, they have FN people claiming their own land. It should have been 'Land Rights'. As for 'never the understanding of the people of this territory'.. what people? New arrivals? Out of the total Yukon land mass FN got 4%. Umbrella final agreement, band by band negotiations, divide and conquer. Did the British colonize First Nations or was it the Canadian government?
Up 22 Down 3
JustSayin' on Mar 19, 2021 at 4:45 pm
The primary issue I can see after reading the UFA, is that when read in the sections, things are clear. When sections are pulled out and not in the spirit of the agreement is when issues become convoluted, as they are now. I wonder what the drafters and signatories think of the UFA and YESSAB.
YESSAB is a joke and does not conform to it's mandate, they push the mandates and let government(s) dictate what should be done. That was never YESSAB's job. When it takes 5 years to permit a mine and then the decision is overturned... Lucy, you've got some explaining to do.
Up 15 Down 50
Woodcutter on Mar 19, 2021 at 4:33 pm
More uninformed comments from the right side of the peanut gallery. Before you make comments on the UFA, take the time to study it, as well as each separate self governing agreements .
Once you've taken the time, perhaps all the stupid questions will end. However that's very doubtful.
Up 37 Down 10
bonanzajoe on Mar 18, 2021 at 9:17 pm
Max Mack: look on the bright side, no colonizers, no taxes. Then guess who will have to do all the contributing to society.
Up 23 Down 8
bonanzajoe on Mar 18, 2021 at 9:14 pm
BNR: Hope you get a buyer for your bridge. Maybe the Liberals would be interested.
Up 20 Down 34
BnR on Mar 18, 2021 at 1:02 pm
The Yukon Party would have listened to the First Nation and NEVER allowed this project to go proceed.......
And, I've got a bridge for sale!
Up 65 Down 11
YT on Mar 18, 2021 at 12:58 pm
Na-cho Nyäk Dun had the same opportunity to submit their concerns to the YESAB review as every other Yukoner did.
Up 68 Down 14
Max Mack on Mar 18, 2021 at 9:21 am
How's reconciliation working out for 'ya, Sandy?
Unfortunately, government will probably lose this case as the courts - in their "wisdom" - have effectively ruled that meaningful consultation means giving the FNs whatever it is they want. In fact, this may be the government's plan. Pretend to give approval and then let the courts do the dirty work of throwing out the approval. Everybody is in on the deal, except the exploration outfit and the public.
Soon, there will be no land left in the Yukon where colonizers are welcome . . .
Up 29 Down 23
TheHammer on Mar 17, 2021 at 6:13 pm
Another breach of trust on the issue of First Nations land rights. This is unacceptable behavior. 'What we have here is a failure to communicate." With a progressive increase in population conflicts over land use are bound to escalate. The behavior of the Government on this issue is evidence the leadership making the decisions are strangers to the Yukon Territory.
Up 71 Down 19
Dave on Mar 17, 2021 at 5:03 pm
When the UFA was signed we thought there was going to be FN category A land and FN category B land. No one ever envisioned that FNs were going to use the UFA to say they have a veto over every single remaining part of this territory. If that’s the case the UFA needs to be torn up as this was never the understanding of the people of this territory at that time. We did not give the government of the day a mandate or the authority to sign this territory over to FNs.
Up 55 Down 8
Groucho d'North on Mar 17, 2021 at 4:56 pm
So what is the legal definition of traditional territory in this context? Settlement land (A, B lands) or Crown land? There is too much fuzzy language being used in these matters. I hope reporters will be more clear in the future.