Thank you to everyone here for the invitation to speak on a matter of great importance to my community, which is the K'ómoks First Nation, and in fact to all indigenous communities, whether they are under the Indian Act, land code, or are self-governing under a modern treaty.
I'd like to start with the following statement.
Self-government and the rule of law are meaningless and empty slogans if first nation laws cannot be enforced. The Crown has the necessary tools to enforce its laws. Federal and provincial governments are well financed and equipped with police forces, prosecutors and courts to ensure their laws are enforced. Enforcement of first nation laws is complex because the right enforcement tools are not available and capacity for enforcement is not yet developed with first nations.
In British Columbia, the RCMP will generally not enforce first nation laws because the provincial prosecution service will not prosecute offences under first nation laws, whether they are bylaws under the Indian Act, land code laws, or laws enacted by treaty nations. This is because they are not enactments for the purposes of provincial law.
The K'ómoks First Nation helped fill this jurisdictional void by addressing the unenforceability issue head-on in court in 2018 with the K'ómoks First Nation v. Thordarson and Sorbie decision. K'ómoks had a lessee, Ryan Thordarson, and his wife, Amelia Sorbie, who refused to pay rent to their landlord, who held a certificate of possession. Their lease was terminated and they were evicted. However, they still refused to leave. By refusing to leave, they had committed a land code offence because they had no lawful right to be on our lands. They were thus issued a notice of trespass by me under our land code, which is a quasi-criminal offence.
I should state that the difference between Indian Act bylaws and land code is that the authority is transferred from Canada to first nation land code nations to develop laws and to have those enforced. That's where this confusion seems to come in.
The RCMP said they could not remove Thordarson or charge them under the land code offence. They would attend and keep the peace as our laws were not “real laws”. The Crown would not prosecute as it didn't recognize our laws or the authority we had to create these laws. These are not bylaws; these are laws.
K'ómoks had a difficult decision. We had someone squatting on our land illegally, so we decided the only way forward was to charge and prosecute the offence itself via Criminal Code provisions that allow for a private prosecution of a criminal offence. This was unheard of.
The court was baffled and unfamiliar with the land code and the authority granted to develop and enforce laws under the framework agreement of the First Nations Land Management Act. After 10 months in court proceedings, the court eventually got to the understanding and ordered the police to remove the trespasser. This carried significant costs to K'ómoks in legal fees for private prosecution, in the ballpark of $178,000. The trespassers got 10 months of free rent and were fined $1,000 each. This was hardly an equitable decision. It was an extremely costly process. We should not have had to go to court to get that court order.
Just this week—today, in fact—we have another trespasser on reserve who was issued a notice of trespass by me and an RCMP officer two days ago. We are not hopeful that he will leave. In fact, he has dared us to take him to court. We could potentially be looking at another costly court case.
With the court decision in Thordarson in favour of K'ómoks, the question of enforcement should be a non-issue and the RCMP should be there to enforce the matter. However, we've been told by the RCMP lawyer that they have not been granted that direction from higher-ups within the RCMP. While our relationship with the RCMP has drastically improved due to a change in inspectors, their hands are tied at the moment with regard to enforcing laws, because of the lack of direction from above.
A big selling feature of the land code framework agreement is being self-governing on our reserve lands, with the ability to create our own laws and have them enforced and recognized in courts, which wasn't happening under the Indian Act. Funding also remains an issue to develop laws and enforcement.
A secondary issue that we have is that K'ómoks is also in the ninth year of stage five treaty negotiations. We recently held a forum on first nation law enforcement in partnership with the BC Treaty Commission. This forum included land code nations, nations negotiating treaties and self-governing nations, as well as police officers and representatives from the offices of the attorneys general, both federal and provincial.
What we learned was that nations such as Maa-nulth and Tla'amin have been struggling with enforcement issues as treaty nations, and neither has successfully prosecuted a single offence under their laws.
To date, the only modern treaty nation to successfully address an enforcement issue is the Tsawwassen First Nation, which has a very costly enforcement agreement with the Delta municipal police.
To be self-governing, first nations need to have proper enforcement tools, including an adjudicative body, enforcement services and capacity for policing, and mechanisms that harmonize with the provincial court administrative systems.
We are trying to achieve the above through our land code by creating things like community protection laws, adjudication laws and a justice tribunal, and also through our treaty negotiations because we are very close to voting on a treaty. If we're dealing with this under the land code as a self-governing portion under the Indian Act, then how is this going to work out for a treaty? So far, modern-day treaties provide only the first of these tools, and that is law-making. It's the same with the land code.
Before closing, I just want to refer back to the enforcement forum that was hosted by the BC Treaty Commission. It had a number of recommendations. I'm happy to provide these to you, to whomever I need to provide them to, so that they can be shared. There are a number of recommendations, including needing language in the treaty to ensure that first nations laws under treaty can be adjudicated under a first nations justice tribunal.
With regard to the mechanics of enforcement, we need to change the treaty language and provincial law to clarify that first nations laws are “enactments” for the purpose of the Provincial Court Act. That will allow the filing of a first nations justice tribunal order and enable it to come to the order of a court to trigger court enforcement mechanisms.
With regard to policing and enforcement agencies, we have tried for years to negotiate a tripartite agreement with the Province of B.C. and the RCMP, and we have been told repeatedly that they no longer do these tripartite agreements. I understand that may be changing, and I really hope it does. The issues we're facing here in K'ómoks with drug dealers, people trespassing....