Brent’s Answer: Not currently, no. As mentioned earlier, one Nation has developed a law that includes a healing circle and other traditional practices that an offender may choose to participate in so as not to be banished from the community for their bad behaviour.
Brent’s Answer: The Maa-nulth Enforcement Advisory Committee (all Indigenous members) is overseeing the development of the course. Contributors include both Indigenous and non-Indigenous lawyers, as well as other Indigenous professionals.
Brent’s Answer: Brent thinks it would be a good idea, but that will be up to K’ómoks and the RCMP to decide.
Brent’s Answer: The Maa-nulth Enforcement Advisory Committee is developing an Enforcement Guide and a Cultural Sensitivity Training curriculum that will form the basis for a two-day course introducing and guiding external enforcement agency officers in their enforcement of Maa-nulth laws. This work has not yet been finalized (interrupted by the pandemic) and is ongoing.
Brent’s Answer: This issue is an ongoing struggle, although we have recently been making progress. We recently were able to utilize the RCMP to issue a Compliance Notice against a non-citizen resident on treaty lands who had threatened another person with a rock. No physical harm was done, but the Nation decided it was important to document the incident and to let the perpetrator know such behaviour would not be tolerated in the future. One of the Maa-nulth has recently enacted a banishment law that utilizes traditional practices with a healing circle built into the due process, including steps to ensure [...]
Brent’s Answer: There has only been one significant enforcement issue. The offence was the illegal harvesting of an elk. Because the poacher was a person of some significance, the Nation wanted to proceed under its own laws, however, because the Nation did not have its own enforcement officers, the investigation was carried out by an external enforcement agency which failed to recognize the limitation period for laying charges under Maa-nulth law. The limitation period was missed, so in the end, charges were laid under Provincial law and the poacher plead guilty. The community, through its elders’ advisory committee, took other steps [...]
No, we do not. In the past, KFN has been trying to get a tri-partite agreement and KFN has been working with the Department of Justice to get them to pass that direction to the RCMP. Part of our Treaty Related Measure work is to attempt to reach agreement with the RCMP on enforcement.
There are no names addressees or numbers – Police are governed by personal privacy laws that govern what we can and cannot put in the reports. The information includes, the area of crime, successful processions, provincial stats: speeding tickets.
K’ómoks is in a good position as we have learned under the Land Code and are now learning from other First Nations who are under Treaty. We know what the problems are, and what the shortcomings are under the Land Code and what other First Nations are experiencing under Treaty. We are now taking the lead on this to negotiate better arrangements around enforcement for future Treaty Nations. The intention is trying to have something that can make the transition to Treaty more workable. All the work we are doing right now, will help the transition to self government.
Funds will be provided under the Fiscal Finance Agreements (FFA) for enforcement, but you will probably need to enter into enforcement agreements with enforcement agencies. For the Maa-Nulth, the agreements that have been entered into, they all address costing and are based on a fee for service - but if the officers are doing patrols, then there is no cost. If they have been asked to go out by a nation (e.g. Maa-Nulth) – then the cost is split 50-50. If the external agencies are asked to do something outside of the ordinary, it would be 100% the Nation's costs. But [...]
