Pimicikamak government

Pimicikamak is an indigenous people in Canada. Pimicikamak is related to, but constitutionally, legally, historically and administratively distinct from, the Cross Lake First Nation which is a statutory creation that provides services on behalf of the Canadian Government. Pimicikamak government is based on

Traditional government

A modern Pimicikamak leader is quoted as saying: "Our ancestors governed themselves in our territory since time immemorial. Pimicikamak did not have rulers. It had leaders. Leadership was based on consensus and especially upon respect that was earned." [John Miswagon, "A Government of our Own", Frontier Centre for Public Policy, 21 April 2005, http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=1043, accessed 24 September 2008.] Oral history told by Pimicikamak elders says that traditional government under customary law (Pimicikamak Okimowin) was consensual, like other Cree governments. [Victor P. Lytwyn, "Muskekowuck Athiniwuck: Original People of the Great Swampy Land", University of Manitoba Press, Winnipeg (2002), p. 23.] Customary law is well-recognized in the jurisprudence of the U.S., [" [The] laws, customs and usages" of the Chickasaw Nation "governed all property belonging to anyone domesticated and living with them." "Jones v. Lancy", 2 Tex. 342 (1844); cited in "Felix. S. Cohen's Handbook of Federal Indian Law", University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque (1958).] U.K. [In "R. v Secretary of State For Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs", [1982] 2 All E.R. 118, Lord Denning said "These customary laws are not written down. They are handed down by tradition from one generation to another. Yet beyond doubt they are well established and have the force of law within the community."] and Canada. ["Campbell v. British Columbia", 2000 BCSC 1123, citing Lord Denning, the Court said "such rules, whether they result from custom, tradition, agreement, or some other decision making process, are 'laws' in the Dicey constitutional sense."] Pimicikamak leaders were respected persons, possibly of the Midewiwin society. [For example, see Louis Bird, "Swampy Cree Stories", http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/academic/ic/rupert/bird/story.html, accessed 6 September 2008.] "A leader held his position as long as he had the respect of the people." [Sharon Venne, "Understanding Treaty 6: An Indigenous Perspective", in "Aboriginal and Treaty Rights in Canada", Michael Asch, ed., University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver (1997).] As well, oral history says that Elders (the Council of Fire) and women played distinct roles in governance.

Original Constitution

Like other indigenous peoples in Turtle Island ["Turtle Island" is the English translation of the name for North America in many North American indigenous languages.] , Pimicikamak was constituted as a self-governing people under spiritual as well as temporal laws. [So was the state of Israel, see, e.g., Basic Laws of Israel, http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/basic-laws-of-israel, accessed 7 August 2008.] These were passed down orally through stories, ceremonies and traditions [The Supreme Court of Canada considered the use of oral history in "Delgamuukw v. British Columbia", [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010.] that formed part of a culture that enabled Pimicikamak's ancestors to survive as a people in a harsh environment for thousands of years. [A sub-arctic climate, classified as Dfc: Tom L. McKnight & Darrel Hess (2000). "Climate Zones and Types: The Köppen System", Physical Geography: A Landscape Appreciation, Prentice Hall, p. 232.] Many stories say that the elders had a role in speaking of the law and the women had a role in organizing Pimicikamak society. Both came into play at summer gatherings. [Oral history says that summer gatherings usually congregated at Sipiwesk Lake. In winter, survival needs led the people to disperse within its territory.] The Pimicikamak constitution derives from those times. It rests upon custom and is largely uncodified, characteristics it shares with the government of the United Kingdom. [See, e.g., Sarah Carter, "A Guide to the UK Legal System" (2001), http://www.llrx.com/features/uk2.htm#UK%20Legal%20System, accessed 7 August 2008.] It has since evolved [In Canada, it may be significant that indigenous governments can show continuity; see: "Delgamuukw v. British Columbia", [1997] 3 S.C.R 1010; this was a case about aboriginal title but "Self-government claims are subject to the same analytical framework as other Aboriginal rights claims." See Mary Hurley, "Aboriginal Title: The Supreme Court of Canada Decision in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia", http://dsp-psd.tpsgc.gc.ca/Collection-R/LoPBdP/BP/bp459-e.htm, accessed 6 September 2008.] into a modern customary form. [Galit A. Safarty, "International Norm Diffusion in the Pimicikamak Cree Nation: A Model of Legal Mediation", (2007) 48 Harvard International Law Journal 441, at p. 473, http://www.harvardilj.org/attach.php?id=125, accessed 15 August 2008.]

Treaty 5

On September 24, 1875, Tepastenam and two others [They were George Garriock and Proud McKay; see Canada's record of Treaty 5 text: http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/trts/trty5_e.html, accessed 5 September 2008.] signed Treaty 5 [Alexander Morris named it "The Winnipeg Treaty"; see: "The Treaties of Canada with the Indians", Belfords, Clarke & Co., Toronto (1880), p. 143.] with the British Crown at Norway House on behalf of Pimicikamak. It had the effect of amending and partly codifying [As with other treaty records, there are questions about the accuracy of the official text; it has internal inconsistencies, such as the purported signing September 20 at Berens River of a Treaty with a boundary that included Pimicikamak territory -- Lieutenant-Governor Morris' dispatch shows he did not expect to meet Tepastenam at Norway House on September 24; in a letter dated October 11, 1875, to the Minister of the Interior Morris said, "We found [at Norway House] that there were two distinct bands of Indians, the Christian Indians of Norway House, and the Wood or Pagan Indians of Cross Lake", in Alexander Morris, "The Treaties of Canada with the Indians", Belfords, Clarke & Co., Toronto (1880), p. 148; evidently the Treaty boundary was amended accordingly.] Pimicikamak's customary constitution and laws. The official written text of the Treaty [Alexander Morris, "The Treaties of Canada with the Indians", Belfords, Clarke & Co., Toronto (1880).] implicitly depends upon the continuance of Pimicikamak self-government. [E.g., the aboriginal signatories "duly convened in council" undertook "on behalf of all other Indians inhabiting the tract within ceded" to "maintain peace and good order between ... themselves and other tribes of Indians, and between themselves and others of Her Majesty's subjects"; see Treaty 5, www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/trts/trty5_e.html, accessed 5 August 2008.] It appears that, until the 1990s, no other part of Pimicikamak law was codified.

Modern constitutional changes

"Pimicikamak’s traditional government is quite new, and yet it is also ancient." [John Miswagon, "A Government of our Own", Frontier Centre for Public Policy, 21 April 2005, http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=1043, accessed 24 September 2008.] Beginning in 1996, parts of the Pimicikamak traditional constitution were updated and codified in written laws in English. They are based upon self-determination, [Self-determination may be seen as challenging territorial integrity of the state, see, e.g., Vita Gudeleviciute, "Does the Principle of Self-determination Prevail over the Principle of Territorial Integrity?", Int. J. Baltic Law, Vytautas Magnus University School of Law, (2005) Volume 2, no. 2.; Pimicikamak self-determination is governed by its treaty relationship with the Crown, see also: Galit A. Safarty, "International Norm Diffusion in the Pimicikamak Cree Nation: A Model of Legal Mediation", (2007) 48 Harv. Int. Law J. 441, at pp.449 - 450: "Most groups are not aspiring for statehood when seeking self-determination, but rather the survival of their cultural communities." http://www.harvardilj.org/attach.php?id=125, accessed 15 August 2008.] the inherent right of self-government, the Rule of Law and updated traditional principles of democracy and accountability. They deal with making laws in writing, ["The First Written Law, 1996", http://pimicikamak.ca/html%20pages/Laws/Pimicikamak/First%20Law.html, accessed 31 July 2008.] defining who is a Pimicikamak citizen ["The Pimicikamak Citizenship Law, 1999", http://www.pimicikamak.ca/law/LAWoCITf.DOC, accessed 31 July 2008.] and electing an Executive Council. ["The Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999", http://www.pimicikamak.ca/law/LAWoELEf_cor.DOC, accessed 31 July 2008.] Pimicikamak government is an example of direct democracy. Modern written Pimicikamak customary law is subject to acceptance by consensus of a general assembly of the Pimicikamak public. ["The First Written Law, 1996", ss. 15 - 17; http://pimicikamak.ca/html%20pages/Laws/Pimicikamak/First%20Law.html, accessed 4 September 2008.] The roles of the Secretary to the Councils as keeper of customary laws and as the interface between the oral Cree traditional government and the written English world it faces may have arisen in the 1990s. ["The First Written Law, 1996", ss. 7, 12, 18, 21, 23, 25, 33 - 35, 40-43, 46, 47; http://pimicikamak.ca/html%20pages/Laws/Pimicikamak/First%20Law.html, accessed 4 September 2008; there designated "Secretary to the Council".]

Councils

Pimicikamak's four councils [The Womens' Council, the Council of Elders, the Youth Council and the Executive Council.] derive from its traditional form of governance by the elders and women. Each council is elected by its own constituency under its own rules and functions in its own roles by consensus. [The Executive Council exercises the entire executive authority of the nation. The rules for Executive Council elections are codified, with a maximum term of five years, see: "The Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999"; other elections are governed by customary law.] National policy is established by consensus of the Four Councils. [The Four Councils is a single entity comprised of the members of all four councils.] The councils are subject to Pimicikamak law. Pimicikamak law requires the Executive Council to give effect to national policy. ["The Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999", ss. 15 & 23, http://www.pimicikamak.ca/law/LAWoELEf_cor.DOC, accessed 7 August 2008.] Because the traditional councils can call an Executive Council election at any time, ["The Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999", s. 30(c); The Chief may also call an election at any time, otherwise the term of the Executive Council is 5 years.] and its members are the Band Council members "ex officio", ["The Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999", s. 26.] the Band Council tends to regard Pimicikamak national policy as persuasive.

Canadian government relations

The government of Canada has not acknowledged Pimicikamak's customary government in modern times. Its policy is that self-government is an inherent right of aboriginal peoples in Canada ["Aboriginal Self-Government: The Government of Canada's Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government", http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/sg/plcy_e.html.] and that this right is protected by the Constitution of Canada. ["Constitution Act, 1982", s. 35(1), http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/annex_e.html, accessed 29 July 2008.] "The federal government supports the concept of self-government being exercised by Aboriginal nations or other larger groupings of Aboriginal people." [Government of Canada, "Gathering Strength: Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan" (1997),http://www.ahf.ca/pages/download/28_13342, accessed 18 August 2008; this support is not mentioned in a progress report issued 3 years later, "2000 PROGRESS REPORT ON GATHERING STRENGTH - CANADA'S ABORIGINAL ACTION PLAN", http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection/R32-192-2000E.pdf, accessed 18 August 2008.] but does not accept that an aboriginal people may exercise this right without first negotiating it. ["The Government of Canada's Approach to Implementation ofthe Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government" (1995), http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/pub/sg/plcy_e.html#PartI, accessed 18 August 2008.] Negotiation and legislation of self-government can result in domestic, dependent status similar to that of Indian nations in the United States of America, whose governments are defined by Act of Congress. ["Cherokee Nation v. State of Georgia", (1831) 5 Peters, 1.U.S. Chief Justice Marshall said, "They may more correctly, perhaps, be denominated domestic dependent nations."] Canada has not generally accepted Pimicikamak's policy of exercising its inherent right. The government of Canada prefers to deal with Cross Lake First Nation, a domestic, dependent, municipal form of government [Known officially as a Band.] established by Act of Parliament. ["Indian Act", R.S.C., 1985, c. I-5, http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/showtdm/cs/I-5, accessed 22 August 2008.] Under this federal legislation and the terms of various agreements, the Band Council acts as the agent of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in delivering programs to Indians on reserve. Since 1999, several Band Councils have taken and held office pursuant to the "Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999" ["Pimicikamak Election Law, 1999", http://www.pimicikamak.ca/law/LAWoELEf_cor.DOC, accessed 7 August 2008; s. 26 provides that the Chief and Council of the Nation shall be, "ex officio", the Chief and Council of the Band.] instead of the federal legislation. [The government of Canada initially rejected this change but accepted it after extraordinary voter participation in a Pimicikamak election in 1999; see: Galit A. Sarfaty, "International Norm Diffusion in the Pimicikamak Cree Nation: A Model of Legal Mediation", (2007) 48 Harvard Int. Law J. 441, at p. 479, http://www.harvardilj.org/attach.php?id=125, accessed 18 August 2008; Sarfaty attributes Canada's decision to accept the Pimicikamak law to "intense pressure" by indigenous and international groups.]

Manitoba government relations

The government of Manitoba has a respectful relationship with the Pimicikamak government. [Letter Premier Doer to Pimicikamak Okimawin, August, 1999.] In 2002, Minister of Northern and Aboriginal Affairs Oscar Lathlin set a precedent by formally addressing the Pimicikamak National Assembly. [At Cross Lake on 16 December 2002; two other cabinet members attended.] Premier Gary Doer has acknowledged Pimicikamak's government and traditional councils and formally met with its traditional chiefs. [On 25 June 2007.]

Notes