COMMENTARY: First Nations women, children deserve federal action to address ongoing Indian Act discrimination

Senators Sandra Lovelace Nicholas and Brian Francis submitted the next opinion article. Senator Francis is the chair of the Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples and first particular person of Mi’kmaq descent in Prince Edward Island to be appointed to the Pink Chamber. Senator Lovelace Nicolas is a Maliseet girl from the Tobique First Nation in New Brunswick and was instrumental in lobbying for the 1985 laws which reinstated the rights of First Nations girls and their kids in Canada.

For many years, First Nations girls have been combating to show their id to Canada.

Because of sexist and discriminatory provisions within the Indian Act, legions of First Nations girls and their kids have misplaced Indian standing (i.e. the authorized standing of an individual who’s registered below the Indian Act, a bit of federal laws enacted in 1876 designed to assimilate and finally remove First Nations). Along with undermining their sense of id, belonging and membership, dropping standing means they’re reduce off from a variety of federal and provincial packages and companies, banned from voting in band council elections and, in lots of circumstances, shunned from their very own communities.

Two-tiered system

First Nations communities and Indigenous advocacy teams have supplied a roadmap to ending gender discrimination within the Indian Act. As an alternative, the federal authorities has slapped collectively fast fixes which have solely made issues worse. With out quick authorities motion, First Nations with standing could grow to be extinct, depriving future generations of all of the rights and privileges conferred by this authorized standing.

The Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples recently released a review of the federal government’s weak attempts at resolving gender discrimination in the Indian Act, together with notable amendments in 1985, 2010 and 2017. The committee discovered that these amendments have solely sophisticated the registration course of and created two unequal lessons of standing Indians.

Earlier than 1985, a First Nations girl who married a non-First Nations man would lose her standing. But when a person with standing married a non-First Nations girl, she would achieve standing. In an try to resolve this obvious inequity, the federal authorities amended the Indian Act in 1985 to revive standing for girls who had misplaced it by means of marriage.

Nevertheless, this modification additionally created two tiers of standing for First Nations — those that have one guardian with standing and those that have two mother and father with standing. The kids of the one-parent class are deprived as a result of they alone can’t cross on standing to the subsequent era. This is named the “second era cut-off.”

Many have sounded the alarm about this two-tiered system of standing Indians.

Inaccessible strategy

Pamela Palmater, chair in Indigenous governance at Toronto Metropolitan College, mentioned each First Nation on this nation has a “legislated extinction date” that you may calculate primarily based on their delivery, loss of life and the second era cut-off provision of the Indian Act.

The 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples additionally warned that the variety of standing Indians “will seemingly decline drastically” and the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has acknowledged that the second era cut-off provision is discriminatory.

As if the two-tiered system isn’t sophisticated sufficient, the federal authorities muddied the registration course of in 2017 by means of Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Indian Act in response to the Superior Courtroom of Quebec resolution in Descheneaux c. Canada (Procureur général).

On the time, the federal government boasted that this modification would permit “lots of of 1000’s, and even tens of millions” of latest folks to register for standing. However our committee realized that simply over 28,000 new folks have registered as of April 2022.

This is because of numerous components, together with a large backlog of candidates, and it additionally raises severe issues about Indigenous Companies Canada’s potential to successfully implement Invoice S-3. It might even be an indication that the brand new registration provisions within the Indian Act are so complicated and inaccessible that many First Nations persons are unaware they now qualify for standing.

These amendments to the Indian Act are slim, technical and fail to get on the root of ongoing gender discrimination points.

Repeal cut-off

These amendments to the Indian Act are slim, technical and fail to get on the root of ongoing gender discrimination points. It’s additionally disappointing that the federal authorities has solely adopted these amendments in response to courtroom choices, fairly than taking a broad, complete strategy to rectify over 150 years of discrimination.

The federal authorities has mentioned they are going to modify the Indian Act but once more to resolve these points. However to actually guarantee equality for First Nations girls and their descendants, the federal authorities should repeal the second era cut-off provision and overhaul the registration course of.

First Nations girls and their kids additionally deserve a proper apology and compensation for the harms they’ve skilled due to discriminatory registration provisions within the Indian Act.

First Nations ought to determine who has standing, not the federal authorities. It’s time for Canada to lastly finish gender discrimination within the Indian Act, so that each one First Nations girls and their kids will be welcomed house once more and achieve entry to the rights and advantages they deserve.