[All] Fw: Federal Government is using SLAPPS against First Nations

[Louisette Lanteigne]

Hi Folks

SLAPP: Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation. 

By blocking people OUT of democratic processes, it might very well qualify.

Lulu 



----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com>
To: "thomas.mulcair at parl.gc.ca" <thomas.mulcair at parl.gc.ca>; "justin.trudeau at parl.gc.ca" <justin.trudeau at parl.gc.ca>; "Elizabeth.May at parl.gc.ca" <Elizabeth.May at parl.gc.ca>; "pm at pm.gc.ca" <pm at pm.gc.ca>; "info at afn.ca" <info at afn.ca>; ppalmater at politics.ryerson.ca; "susan at raventrust.com" <susan at raventrust.com>; "akoehl at ecojustice.ca" <akoehl at ecojustice.ca>; "satleo at afn.ca" <satleo at afn.ca> 
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 12:42:10 PM
Subject: Federal Government is using SLAPPS against First Nations
 


Dear Hon. Ministers, Prime Minister et al.

As an intervenor at the National Energy Board Hearing I witnessed the following passage in line 458, Volume 1 of the NEB transcript for Enbridge Line 9 

Bien que tout comme l'Office, Enbridge n’ait pas l’obligation indépendante de consulter les groupes autochtones ou d’accommoder leurs intérêts, Enbridge doit néanmoins répondre aux exigences de l’Office, d’entreprendre des démarches auprès des groupes autochtones.


The Transcript can be viewed here at: 
https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=1045208&objAction=browse


Basically Enbridge is trying to use Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2010 SCC 43 at para 31 to negate the need for proper First Nation's Consultation in regards to the National Energy Board's Enbridge Line 9 pipeline hearing. 

The argument to defend against the use of Rio Tinto to bypass reasonable mediation protocols was presented in Volume 5 of the Enbridge Line 9 NEB transcripts as presented by Scott Andrew Smith;  the co-counsel to Aamjiwnaang First Nation and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation. ( Aamjiwnaang First Nation is referred to as AFN and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation as COTTFN). You can view his testimony starting on Line 3182 in Volume 5 as posted here: https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=1050128&objAction=browse

I am quite concerned about this because in my view, the Harper Government clearly has a pattern of negating the need for the Crown to facilitate reasonable consultation processes with First Nations communities.  It happened with Northern Gateway, Line 9 NEB process and in New Brunswick regarding Shale Gas and a number of other projects prior to this. In my view this is nothing more than a SLAPP.

A SLAPP [Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation] can be defined as a lawsuit initiated against one or more individuals or groups that speak out or take a position in a public debate on an issue of public interest. The purpose of SLAPPs is to limit the freedom of expression of the defendants and neutralize their actions by resorting to the courts to intimidate them, deplete their resources and reduce their means of action.
In 2006, the Minister of Justice of Québec created a committee of legal experts to assess the desirability of enacting measures to counter SLAPP suits. Roderick A. Macdonald chaired the committee and was assisted by two other legal experts, Pierre Noreau and Daniel Jutras. Their report, Les Poursuites stratégiques contre la mobilisation publique – Les poursuites-bâillons (SLAPP) [Strategic lawsuits against public mobilization – gag lawsuits (SLAPPs)], was made public in June 2007.
The committee concluded that abusive lawsuits are an observable reality and constitute a serious threat to the participation of citizens and groups in public debate. The committee added that the solution to the SLAPP phenomenon should have defined objectives, such as protecting the right to freedom of expression and opinion, putting a speedy halt to strategic lawsuit proceedings, deterrence of SLAPP lawsuits, safeguarding the integrity and objectives of the judicial institution, and improving access to justice.*
 *Les poursuites stratégiques contre la mobilisation publique – les poursuites-bâillons (SLAPP) [Strategic lawsuits against public mobilization – gag lawsuits (SLAPPs)], p.76.

The lack of reasonable consultation wtih First Nations is not morally, ethically or judicially reasonable. This is clearly a breach of the Constitution Act 1982 section 35.1 as seen here;  http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1982.html and it is in violation of  Specific Treaty Rights and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  

The Harper Government is failing to protect the rights of Aboriginal Canadians by subjecting them these unreasonable SLAPP processes by negating the Crown's duty to consult. 

I demand a legal investigation to review these concerns. 

Louisette Lanteigne
700 Star Flower Ave.
Waterloo Ont.
N2V 2L12
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20131115/dae2a0c2/attachment.html>