Chief Eddie Skookum's leadership review should have been done by consensus, not a vote by the elders, says a growing faction of the Little Salmon-Carmacks First Nation (LSCFN).

Skookum's leadership has been under attack since he pleaded guilty to reckless endangerment of human life in an Alaskan court after his 21-year-old girlfriend was found badly beaten in the parking lot of a Haines hotel last July.

More serious charges of assault were dropped because the young woman refused to testify, according to court records.

Skookum has held onto his seat as chief, but a vocal group of citizens says he is breaking his own First Nation's laws by staying in power, and are demanding an appeal of his leadership.

"The (Little Salmon-Carmacks) constitution states clearly that we as citizens be actively participating in the exercise of our First Nation government,” LSCFN member Lorraine O'Brien writes in the petition appealing the decision to keep Skookum on as chief.

"As LSCFN citizens, we feel that it is our responsibility to respectfully bring forward our concerns regarding the inappropriate behaviour of our chief and the flawed process that was used to determine if the chief is fit to hold office.”

According to a number of Skookum's critics, a Nov. 6 emergency assembly was unconstitutional because it did not strive for consensus before going to an elders' vote .

"The assembly was provided no opportunity to debate the evidence to come to a consensus as per our constitution,” the petition claims.

"There was no opportunity for the assembly to vote on whether the chief was fit to hold office.”

Instead, the decision was given to the elders present. They voted 14 to nine to keep Skookum on as chief, a process which amounted to an "outright veto” of the assembly, according to O'Brien's petition.

"It is the LSCFN citizens who elected the chief and it is the citizens who have the authority to remove the chief through the process of the assembly,” O'Brien writes in the petition, which has garnered more than 80 signatures from a community with approximately 550 eligible voters.

"It is the responsibility of the elders to ensure that the assembly reached its decision by adhering to the LSCFN traditional values and beliefs and that the process followed the constitution with respect and integrity to allow all citizens to voice [their] views.”

In an interview with the Star, O'Brien said some elders were brought to the meeting who had very little information about the charges against Skookum or the opinions of those opposed to his continued leadership.

Others who did not support Skookum were not offered transportation to the meeting, and did not get to vote, said another critic, Florence Washpan.

Another outspoken member of the community, Hazel Skookum, said she was not given a fair chance to speak at the emergency assembly.

All have signed the petition, which proposes a process "that should have been followed under our constitution.”

Citing sections of the First Nation's constitution, it says a new emergency assembly must be called, but this time it should be made clear on posters and other advertisements, that the purpose is to discuss Skookum's leadership.

Once the meeting is called, the petitioners say everyone should be given all the facts and permitted to express their opinion.

"If more time is required for the LSCFN citizens to review the evidence, facts and views provided during the debate, then a subsequent meeting should be called,” the petition states.

"... After adequate debate of the assembly regarding whether the chief is fit to hold office, then it is required to make all effort to resolve the issue by consensus. A vote of the assembly is a measure to be taken as a last

resort.”

The Star has been unable to reach Skookum for comment on this story or previous stories regarding the leadership dispute.